Since Bible And Catholic Catechism Denounce Homosexuality, Why Did John Roberts Help Homosexuals, As Homosexuals, To Get Special Rights?

By John Lofton

In their attempts to defend the indefensible – John Roberts helping advance the homosexual agenda by coaching homosexual activists to win “special rights” in the Romer v. Evans Supreme Court case – many supposedly Christian “leaders” have left the impression that Roberts had no choice but to do what he did because his law firm took this case.

But Roberts did not have to help the homosexuals he helped.

On National Public Radio’s “All Things Considered” program (8/4/05), Walter Smith, John Roberts’ boss at the law firm of Hogan & Hartson, who was head of the pro bono department, said, about Roberts agreeing to help the homosexuals: “John could have said no and that would have been that, no questions asked.” This report paraphrases Smith as saying that he (Smith) often sought Roberts’ help on cases that took a more liberal stance.

As for helping the homosexuals for “about five hours,” Smith is quoted in the “Washington Post” (8/5/05) as saying “but a few hours with John Roberts is probably worth a few weeks with someone else. John was always willing to help with the pro bono cases, regardless of politics. Not all his conservative brethren felt that way.”

THE CATHOLIC CATECHISM speaks of the ‘grave depravity’ of homosexuality.

Smith is quoted in the “New York Times” (8/5/05) as clearing up any implications that Roberts had no choice but to help the homosexuals because his law firm had taken the Romer v. Evans case. He says: “Every good lawyer knows that if there is something in a his client’s cause that so personally offends you, morally, religiously, if it so offends you that you think it would undermine your ability to do your duty as a lawyer, then you shouldn’t take it on, and John wouldn’t have. So, at a minimum, he had no concerns that would rise to that level.”

But, why didn’t Roberts have “moral” or “religious” objections to helping homosexuals get special rights?

Roberts says he is a Christian, a Roman Catholic. The Bible says homosexuality is an “abomination” to God and those engaging in this sin of homsexuality are deserving of death.

The “Catholic Catechism,” in a section on “Chastity and Homosexuality” says, in part: “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.”….

“This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial…. Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.”

So, instead of helping homosexuals to get special rights, why didn’t Roberts refuse to work on their case and tell them what the Bible and his Church teach about homosexuality? At the very least, Roberts, by helping these homosexuals, as homosexuals, showed that he “approved” their sin.

jlof.sig.gif

Discuss this article