Gay Marriage

A recent post of mine about gay marriage has gotten a lot of views and some linkage. In summary, I felt that there was no legal ability on the Federal level to address the issue. It is a state issue, and each state will address it differently. I also discussed marriage law issues that go along with civil recognition of same-sex marriage.

Much of the Net discussion about this issue has also included the Vatican's recent pronouncements, and President Bush's statements at his last news conference.

I'm not surprised at the reaction to these statements. I've come to expect it from the liberal media and the loony left. It still amazes me, however, that those who object are so ready to deny to others rights that they insist upon for themselves.

Let's take the President's comments first. He was asked a question, and he answered honestly and forthrightly. Whether you agree with him or not, he continues to have the same rights as all Americans under the First Amendment. In addition, just as Presidents and non-politicos before him, he has the right to try to enact laws concerning subjects he has strong beliefs on. It's the American way of governance. In my original post I state that I don't believe it will be found Constitutional, but that is the risk taken with any law enacted in this country. It is subject to judicial review, and can be overturned by the courts. It is also subject to input from the voters during and after the enactment process. That's the way things work. Checks and balances.

If you believe polls, they suggest that civil recognition of same-sex marriage is not all that popular a topic in America. It is a property rights issue that affects a small minority of the people, and the President has a lot of support in this matter. My view continues to be that it is not a Federal issue and that, if states wish to recognize same-sex marriage they ought to be prepared to thoroughly revamp their entire set of marriage laws.

On to the Vatican's statements. The Roman Catholic Church teaches faith and morality. It makes clear statements on issues from its perspective and may call upon those who practice its faith to follow those teachings. That's what a church does, any church, be it the Roman Catholic, Baptist, or Mormon. A church should be a clear leader when it comes to determining morality.

Churches should be clear on their moral teachings. Churches should be different, else why have more than one. The Roman Catholic Church has the basic human right, and the right under the Constitution of the United States, to call upon its members to follow its teachings. As does the Democratic Party or the Rotary.

You can be a Catholic and not follow the teachings of the Church. The Church allows for disagreements of conscience in most issues. There is a clearly defined set of beliefs, however, with which no Catholic may disagree and consider themselves in good standing with the Church. That, again, is as it should be. A church should stand for something, and different churches will have differing moral and faith issues. That's why the Roman Catholic Church is not the Baptist Church, and so on.

The Roman Catholic Church's teaching on marriage begin with the belief that the first purpose of marriage is procreation. Anything of human free will that interferes with that can make the marriage invalid or place people into sin. Entering into the sacrament of marriage without the intent to have children is one of the grounds for annulment in the Church. Sex outside of the sacrament of marriage is a moral error, a sin. That is the basis for all Church teachings regarding sex and marriage. You may only have sex within a sacramental marriage, and a sacramental marriage is for the purpose of having children.

A celibate gay can be a Catholic in good standing. Anything other than that violates the Church's moral teachings. Violations of morality are sins, and sins are evil. If you don't like it, don't be a Roman Catholic. You can be a sinner and be a Catholic; we all are. But never, ever expect that the Church will not call what it sees as a sin anything else. If you don't like being called a sinner, either repent and reform, or find another church that believes that your actions are moral.

The Roman Catholic Church is engaged in the salvation of souls. It will not succeed in all cases because people have the free will to reject salvation. But it must try, and in order to try, it must make its teachings known. If you don't like them, you are not forced to follow them, nor are you forced to be a Catholic. Being a Church of sinners, its leaders will make mistakes. That does not eliminate the Church's responsibility to teach morality, nor does it invalidate automatically any and all teachings.

In the United States, the land that pluralism created, the views of the Catholic Church don't carry much weight. That is the way our legal system works. We will never be a theocracy. The Church may lobby lawmakers just as the Sierra Club or the Freedom Forum, and may instruct its members in legislative bodies in the same manner that trade unions or political parties do. That is our way. We should celebrate that the Church can do this, not act as if it is an abomination in our political system. And, when our lawmakers follow their consciences, and practice their strongly held beliefs, we should celebrate as well. Better a believing Catholic that a bought and paid for rep of the Teamsters or Enron.

-- posted by Chuck at Monday, August 04, 2003 | E-mail | Permalink | Main | 0 comments

You Big Mouth, You!

Archives

Other Sites of Note

Monday, August 04, 2003

Gay Marriage