""In my view, Bishop Burke attempted to use his interpretations of theology to coerce me into taking specific positions on matters that I believe are matters of constitutional law," Obey writes near the end of the piece, which the magazine provided to reporters."
The Bishop is not interpreting dogma. He is stating it.
""The difference between us is that I am not trying to force him to agree with my judgments, but he is attempting to force me to agree with his. That in conscience I cannot do.""
You are trying to force your judgment upon the Bishop while rejecting his teaching. You cannot have it both ways.
If you cannot hold to the teachings, leave.
I had no idea that Bishop Burke had invented the Catholic faith specifically to impose his judgments on others. Silly me, I assumed that the Bishop was simply defending the faith... I guess to a liberal, that means "forcing" Catholics to agree with it, and we can't have that! Obey can disagree all he wants... but then he can't claim faithful membership in the Catholic church. Why is this so hard to understand? Lately I've been doing some reading on racial issues in politics. It occurs to me how strange it is that to the liberals, a black conservative can lose his/her ethnic ancestry by not voting with the Congressional Black Caucus, but Catholicism (unlike race, apparently) is an immutable characteristic obtained by birth, Catholic school, or being an altar boy... and nothing you can do can ever change it.