The is/ought distinction and the Nigerian Anglicans

For the record, I do not wish with any post made here to get involved in what a church decides is or is not "orthodox". But when the Church steps over the line into the Magisterium of the State, one has to speak up.

The Church of Nigeria has a new release on the "Absurdity of Same Sex Unions" by the Rt. Rev. David Onuoha. Here's the meat:

There is no doubt that advocates of gay marriage are motivated by the need to preserve the rights of those who are inclined to live perversely. There is nothing wrong in preserving ones right. Human right ensures that man lives as he ought to and not as he likes to.

It is very clear that if everyone is allowed to live as one likes to live, there will be chaos and anarchy. This is why the law is there to guide ones life as one ought to. Man, at creation, has his freewill which guarantees freedom of choice and action. He is free to choose between good and evil, right and wrong etc. [emphasis mine]

In other words, human rights are all well and good, as long as they're legal. It seems that the Church of Nigeria is going into apology mode, working to develop a rationale for its endorsement of recent anti-homosexual legislation (pdf) and its violation of internationally accepted standards of human rights, as well a logical framework for extending the Church's sphere of moral influence into the State. Hat tip to Thinking Anglicans.