Here’s the irony! As of recently blogger Blamethe1st has been attacking religiously minded Christians whom he used to defend on these subjects. Here is a little bit of background info.
“Also, on a related note, f*** Kim Davis! She is not a martyr. She is an obnoxious b**** a** c*** who is refusing to do her job. She wants to administer marriage licenses? Then she has to administer all of them. She can’t pick and choose which laws to enforce or not. She doesn’t like it? Then by all means, step down. Otherwise, she’s acting like a b**** a** c***, and anyone who supports her is likewise a b**** a** c***!”
I guess that makes me “a b**** a** c***.” I’m not really phased by that, really. Anyway, I put in some extra bleeps to censor them. Tourette’s, anypony? So this is extremely strange, awkward and unbecoming of somebody who publicly boasts on his profile picture of being “pro-Christian”. There’s nothing pro-Christian about that and certainly nothing Christian about it. She “is refusing to do her job”?! I thought he was a libertarian. From what I have read he might even be an anarchist now which is even more ironic since anarchism rejects all forms of government.
I feel like it’s useless by now to once again state the Supreme Court has never had any constitutional authority to make/undo laws. Their job as the judicial branch is to uphold the law, not create new ones or repeal old ones. You’d expect a self-professed libertarian to know this. Either way however you’d also expect a self-professed Christian to know we cannot support gay “marriage” regardless of what the culture says. Whatever happened to “We must obey God rather than men”?
But I guess it’s okay to “pick and choose which” doctrines “to enforce or not.” Does he really have the capacity to debate at an intellectual level or does everything have to be based on sensationalist or ad hominem rhetoric? I don’t know what God he believes in, but it can’t be the one of Scripture and Tradition who said two men — or two women for that matter — cannot have sexual intercourse with each other (rf. Leviticus 18:22, Romans 1:21-25) as it goes against the natural order. That natural order is the natural union of man and woman in a stable institution called marriage for the procreation or rearing of children.
It doesn’t end there. Apparently he thinks teaching Christianity in Christian school is brainwashing. How is that pro-Christian? The early Christians preached out in the streets and baptized people in the thousands. Christianity was never meant to be a “keep it to yourself” religion; Our Lord issued the Great Commission. “Go therefore,” He said, “and make disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19). What’s pretty funny though is the Evangelical Protestant flag hanging in the background with a Catholic nun in the same scene. Where’s the consistency in that?
I also can’t come to terms with legalizing drugs like heroine and cocaine especially for casual use. The use of drugs “except on strictly therapeutic grounds” (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 2291) is a grave abuse on the body. Many have died from heroine and cocaine, many have gone violent, gotten nosebleeds, heart attacks, hallucinations, paranoia, etc . It’s not the same as trans fats or corn syrup; those narcotics are much more harmful and have more immediate effects than things that are put in food and beverages. Again I don’t see a Christian promoting narcotics use since it’s a lack of charity to oneself and profanes the body; Saint Paul exhorts us to “glorify the Lord in your body” (cf. 1 Corinthians 6:20).
You can read it here: http://blamethe1st.blogspot.com/2015/09/taking-down-rainbow-icon.html?m=1