President Supports Homosexual 'Marriage': Obama's Fool's Gold Rule

That Obama would use the Golden Rule to justify, to sanction, indeed to compel State support for activity that is considered offensive by any traditional Jew and Christian--and any virtuous pagan--betrays his ignorance, or perhaps even willful misuse of it.

That Obama would use the Golden Rule to justify, to sanction, indeed to compel State support for activity that is considered offensive by any traditional Jew and Christian-and any virtuous pagan-betrays his ignorance, or perhaps even willful misuse of it. 

CORPUS CHRISTI, TX (Catholic Online) - "All that glisters is not gold," says Portia to her suitor the Prince of Morocco in Shakespeare's "Merchant of Venice."  More distantly, in the 12th century, Alain de Lille wrote, "do not hold everything gold that shines like gold."  Non teneas aurum totum quod splendet ut aurum.
 
Gold, of course, is considered precious because it does not oxidize.  If something rusts, it is not gold.  It is fool's gold. 

In his interview with ABC reporter Robin Roberts, Obama announced his support for same-sex "marriage" by invoking the Golden Rule.  "It's also the Golden Rule, you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated."
 
To invoke the "Golden Rule" to justify support for same-sex "marriage" is a travesty, a mockery of that rule. 

Obama's "Golden" Rule--like the faux "marriages" he justifies with it--is faux gold.
 
That Obama would use the Golden Rule to justify, to sanction, indeed to compel State support for activity that is considered offensive by any traditional Jew and Christian--and any virtuous pagan--betrays his ignorance, or perhaps even willful misuse of it. 

How can the Christian Golden Rule be used to justify support for something that Christian Bible says is one of only four sins which are so offensive that they cry out to heaven for vengeance?  (Cf. Gen. 18:20; 19:13; see also Catechism of the Catholic Church § 1867)

How can the Golden Rule, which Christ says fulfills the law and the prophets (Matt. 7:12), be used to advance something against the law and the prophets?

President Obama also claimed that Michelle and he are "practicing Christians," but, if so, then we would suppose that he would understand the "Golden Rule" as a practicing Christian, that is, within the same Tradition that birthed it, and not outside of it.  We would suppose a legitimate Golden Rule, not a bastardization of it.

Nothing is new under the sun, says Ecclesiastes.  (Eccl. 1:9)  And it is not new that the Golden Rule should be invoked--and bastardized--by the ignorant and the vicious to justify sin.  That effort has been around at least since the 4th century when St. Augustine had an opportunity to address that very issue.

In his lengthy discourse on the Lord's Sermon on the Mount, St. Augustine had reason to treat of those who would use the Lord's Golden Rule--"all things therefore whatsoever you would that men should do unto you, so do you also unto them"--to justify all manner of evils. 

St. Augustine, like any Christian worth his or her salt, understood that "whatsoever" had an implied "good" attached to it.

"The expression used-'whatsoever you would'-should not be taken as spoken in a broad, general sense," said St. Augustine, "but with a restricted application: that is to say, the will is present only in the good; in evil and wicked actions cupidity is the word, not will."

Simply put, St. Augustine insisted that the Golden Rule must be understood as incorporating within it the natural moral law, for the natural law defines what is good, insists that we pursue that good, and insists that we avoid its opposite. 

Otherwise, St. Augustine observed, we would confront the "ridiculous" situation where this text could be used to justify all matter of wrongs.  For example, "if someone wished something wicked done to him," it would justify him doing that very wrong "upon the person by whom he wished to be performed upon himself."
 
If one wrests the Golden Rule from its natural law moorings, we do land in a "ridiculous" state.  We end up in a place where the drunkard would force others to drink so that he could justify his drinking (St. Augustine's example).  The masochist could use it to justify sadism.  The homosexual could use it to force others to engage in homosexuality.  The husband wishing to commit adultery would invoke it to encourage his wife to be unfaithful. 

We end up in a place where everything and anything goes--where not the good, but "cupidity," sin, evil reigns.

That is exactly the situation in which President Obama finds himself.  Completely disregarding the natural law basis of the Golden Rule, ignoring the entire teaching of the law or the prophets, President Obama is in the "ridiculous" situation where the Golden Rule is being used--not only to justify evil, i.e., homosexual activity--but to require us positively to support it by advancing, promoting, and using law's force to compel such support.

This isn't the Golden Rule.  This is the "Fool's Gold" Rule.

This isn't Christianity.  This is secularism, relativism using Christian words in an anti-Christian way.  It is using the Christian Tradition against the Christian Tradition.  This is forked-tongue morality.

This is "ridiculous" talk, Mr. President. 

Ridiculum est hunc putare istam implevisse sententiam! is what St. Augustine would tell you. 

It's ridiculous to think that by advocating same-sex "marriage" and forcing it up us you are fulfilling the Golden Rule.  We Christians are not fooled.

-----

Andrew M. Greenwell is an attorney licensed to practice law in Texas, practicing in Corpus Christi, Texas.  He is married with three children.  He maintains a blog entirely devoted to the natural law called Lex Christianorum.  You can contact Andrew at agreenwell@harris-greenwell.com.

---

'Help Give every Student and Teacher FREE resources for a world-class Moral Catholic Education'

Copyright 2021 - Distributed by Catholic Online