I heard about this the other day, but I haven't had time to comment on it:

Washington DC, Mar 6, 2008 (CNA).- Democrat presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama in a speech before a Hocking College crowd on Sunday claimed that the Sermon on the Mount justifies his support for legal recognition of same-sex unions, Cybercast News Service reports.

Obama’s speech drew perplexed responses from commentators who did not see the connection.

"I don't think it [a same-sex union] should be called marriage, but I think that it is a legal right that they should have that is recognized by the state," said Obama. "If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans."

The Sermon on the Mount, as recorded in the Gospel of Matthew, includes the Beatitudes, an endorsement of scriptural moral commandments, and condemnations of murder, divorce, and adultery. The passage in Romans (1:27) referred to by Obama condemns those who have rejected their creation in God’s image by their actions, among the acts mentioned is homosexual sex.

Kiera McCaffrey director of communications for the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, responded to Obama’s remarks on same-sex unions.

"It seems pretty bogus using (the Bible) to justify civil unions," McCaffrey told Cybercast News Service. "He should be using secular reasons to back it up.

In the extended entry you'll find links to Matthew 5-7, and if anyone can find a justification in there for civil unions, I'll be mighty surprised. Of course, I don't think that Obama really meant what he said - its a common failing of liberals to say things which seem appropriate but actually are at variance with facts and common sense. It sounds good to say that providing civil unions is in the spirit of the Sermon - with its injunctions to love one another, it seems a natural (to a liberal) that this sense of love must cover civil unions...forgetting that love is not a soft and squishy feeling, but a bold and courageous fact. To love someone doesn't always mean being nice to them - not in the sense of refusing to give offense. When someone is doing wrong, the most loving thing a person can do is to gently remonstrate with them and encourage them down the right path.

Our brothers and sisters who have that deep-seated attraction for members of the same sex need our love - but our love must be directed towards helping them do the right thing, not give in to doing the wrong thing just because it feels good, or that they've bought the asinine idea that only in sexual intercourse is a person complete. We must never be mean - we must never be unjust; we must not do anything to harm those who are gay...but we must also never do anything which puts a seal of approval (actual or implied) in living a homosexual life. One of the larger problems in our society - the thing which is primarily responsible for our inability to solve our social problems - is the way we hide like cowards behind the word "love" and try to pretend it means must be nice to everyone.

For Obama to speak thusly betrays either a startling ignorance of the faith he professes, or a cynical desire to hijack the words of Christianity for un-Christian causes. We are called to be perfect, in that Sermon, as our heavily Father is perfect - and if Obama wishes to apply the Sermon to politics, then I'm all in favor of that...but please apply it as it is, not as a liberal wishes it would be.

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.battlebornpolitics.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/152