Garrick Bercero

Why would a person choose to be in a job that goes against their religious beliefs? And why should we expect a company to retain a person who cannot effectively do their job?

There is a lot of ambiguous language that conservatives employ to muddy the real issue and their intention in asking the question in the first place. Most confusing of all is how they conflate “life” with “personhood.”

Privilege is the luxury to not understand. The Christian majority can live their lives worry-free, not understanding what non-Christians have to deal with. While, non-Christians are always reminded to be sensitive to Christian beliefs.

Access to information is a class issue; ignorance is not. It is often the case that people who have the privilege of access to limitless information simply reject it on principle, because of dogma, superstition, and blind allegiance to authority.

The one strand you can gather from their responses can be summed up as, “my local parish seems to be doing fine, so the study must be wrong.” This is a classic fallacy of composition, where what is true for a part is assumed to be true for the whole.

This is the Christian faith: that Jesus died for our sins that we may have eternal life, if we believe.

The confessional is where priests have believers by the balls. This is true both figuratively and literally.

Bears defecate in the woods, and popes are Catholic. It therefore comes as no shock that the new Pope Francis is an enemy of equal rights for the LGBT.

Only people who believe that their faith cannot stand on its own merit need Article 133.