Read Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070 for yourself. Unlike most people who are fuming and spitting angry words about it having not read it, you and I will read the thing and then have something to say. It’s only 17 pages, for crying out loud. (I think sb1070s is the Senate version and sb1070h is the House one, but I’m guessing.) I just saw this little blurb while searching for 1070:
“Arizona’s SB 1070 must be named as a social and racial sin, and should be denounced as such by people of faith and conscience across the nation.” —Jim Wallis on the Puffington Host, er, I mean, the Huffington Post.
You can do a search to find the article. I don’t care to link to such trash. But what the heck is a social sin or a racial one? Sin is sin, it’s a religious, a theological term. There’s venial sin, grave sin, mortal sin. But social? Racial? A person sins. A human person sins against another person, and that person may be a member of this group, that group. (All humans are persons, contrary to what some professors of “bioethics” are teaching these days. But not all persons are human; some are angelic and Three are Divine.) And I would venture to say that all sin is ultimately against God Himself and that’s what really matters. But this notion of a person sinning against a group…I think this is confusing and confused. If I sin, I sin against a person. If I sin against a group of persons, I think we still have to look at it one person at a time, or as a relationship between myself and each person in that group, individually. Person to person.
And this talk about the human person as opposed to this mythical collective brings me to tell you about the book I’m reading right now. (Well, one of the books I’m reading right now.) It’s Love and Responsibility by Karol Wojtyla, the man who would later be Pope John Paul II. I bought my copy recently and I’ve barely begun reading it. But allow me to quote from the back cover for now and I’ll write more about it in the coming days and weeks.
“He [Wojtyla] writes in the conviction that science—biology, psychology, sociology,—can provide valuable information on particular aspects of relations between the sexes, but that a full understanding can be obtained only by study of the human person as a whole.
Central to his argument is the contrast between the personalistic and the utilitarian views of marriage and of sexual relations. The former views marriage as an interpersonal relationship, in which the well-being and self-realization of each partner are of over-riding importance to the other. It is only within this framework that the full purpose of marriage can be realized. The alternative, utilitarian view, according to which a sexual partner is an object for use, holds no possibility of fulfillment and happiness…
Perhaps the most striking feature of the book is that the author appeals throughout to ordinary, human experience, logically examined…[T]he author’s approach ensures that non-Christians also can consider his arguments on their own merits. —From the back cover of Love and Responsibility by Karol Wojtyla.