I’m confused about what part is against her religion:
Regardless, we know whose religious rights will be protected by the SCOTUS most high: the one who is imposing her ignorant worldview upon a captive audience. Funny how believing in magic gets you extra rights in this country.
I always love how the Catholic Church gets to have it both ways: they simultaneously are bound by centuries of traditions that they revere, but are also not to held accountable for the damage that they’ve done merely a decade ago.
Have they apologized for trying to force their morally backwards religion on people? Have they funded lobbies to expand LGBTQ rights to reverse some of the damage they’ve done historically?
Do you think that the Cardinals who run the diaces who donated thone millions of dollars have reformed their ideas regarding same-sex marriage?
All the Catholic Church has done is to dress up their bigotry as inclusion, and credulous news agencies do their PR for them about how much the Catholic Church has changed to be more inclusive.
So I ask you, if you think they’ve changed: what exactly have they changed? They still lobby the government to impose their religion on the rest of us, they still believe that “acting on” gay urges is evil and weak, and they are still hiding child predators. The Catholic Church is an enormous institution, and merely replacing the CEO doesn’t mean that every franchise is magically aligned with his new vision.
So how is pointing out their actual values (a particularly ironic turn of phrase) “bad faith?”
They’ve shown their contempt for sexual minorities for centuries; I think we should believe them.
Sure, but Jesus would have smacked the shit out of Paul, too. It’s kind of been that way since the beginning of the religion.