"As a Christian pharmacist I have beliefs that are at the core of my being. These beliefs are based on a Higher Power, a greater wisdom than that of feeble human beings. Each time I am required to dispense medications that encourage other to commit immoral acts, I share their guilt, and I participate in them hurting themselves. God has taught us these things to protect us, and if that light has been brought to our eyes, we are responsible for it. Because of this I cannot fill prescriptions that go against my beliefs. It is a violation of myself, harms myself and the customers who naively seek this harm."
"It is my moral responsibility to vote against gay marriage. God has given us a model for how to build a stable, moral family unit. The health of a whole society is based on this family unit. When we deny this wisdom, allow unnatural sexual pairings and call these a sacred marriage, we harm every one in society including those who participate in this unnatural love. It is our responsibility as moral citizens to protect these people from themselves and to protect our cherished, stable, moral traditions."
My personal position is opposite of these preceding paragraphs, but i am familiar with the justifying lingo. Tired of it,but know it inside and out. So the assumption you put forth that using different language proves a lack of comprehension about a different point of view can at times be correct, but I suggest that it is by no means certainly true in all cases.