It’s a sure sign of spring, as predictable as the Red Sox
at spring training, the swallows returning to Capistrano, and the
flowing of green beer on St. Patrick’s Day. I’m referring of course to
the public re-appearance of the determined proponents of homosexual
marriage.
Find the Bishop on Facebook, here
It seems that each year at this time the left-leaning columnists, the
organized advocates, and the lobbyists at the State House awaken from
their hibernation to take-up their perennial campaign to redefine
marriage in Rhode Island and impose their personal preferences upon the
citizenry of our State.
The public debate about same-sex marriage always includes questions
like: “What’s the problem with same-sex marriage?” and “How will it
affect my life?” Although these questions have been answered repeatedly
and clearly in a variety of contexts, including this column, permit me
to summarize once again just some of the problems that accompany the
proposal to legalize homosexual marriage.
1) The proposal to
legalize homosexual marriage is an attempt to redefine the institution
of marriage as it has existed from the very beginning of human history. Marriage
between a man and woman was designed by God and has two fundamental
purposes: It affirms the difference and the complementarity of males and
females in a loving relationship, and it provides the foundation for
the procreation and raising of children. Marriage thus described has
been the fundamental unit, the building block of every human culture and
society. Think about it: God created two different genders for a
reason – so that males and females could come together, complement one
another, procreate, and continue the species.
And be very clear
about this – same-sex marriage isn’t about procuring civil rights for
beleaguered homosexual persons. The recently adopted civil-unions
legislation, as ill-advised as it was, it provided the legal protections
activists have been lobbying for, but the opportunity has been widely
ignored. Same-sex marriage legislation is about distorting a venerable
institution – not about civil rights.
2) Homosexual marriage enshrines into civil law immoral activity.
Let me emphasize once again, as I have repeatedly in the past: our
opposition to this legislative initiative, to same-sex marriage, should
not be construed as an attack on or rejection of individuals with
same-sex attraction. Homosexual persons are children of God who possess
the same human dignity as every other human being. That affirmation,
however, doesn’t mean that their sexual activity needs to be accepted
and celebrated.
The natural law, the Holy Scriptures and
long-standing religious tradition are very consistent in stating that
homosexual activity is immoral, an offense to God, a serious sin.
Heterosexual relationships are normative in nature; homosexual
relationships are not. The promotion of homosexual marriage is an
attempt to rationalize such behavior and to give it the affirmation, the
“blessing” of the state. It upgrades private behavior to another level.
3) The concept of same-sex marriage is a social experiment with unpredictable outcomes.
Supporters of same-sex marriage often say something like: “Well,
they’ve had same-sex marriage in Massachusetts for several years now and
the sky hasn’t fallen in.” Well that’s true of course, the sky hasn’t
fallen. But the reality of marriage and family life, and its effects
upon society, are far more subtle and profound than that shallow
assessment would allow. The attempted marriage of homosexual individuals
is a significant change in the human landscape; it’s a social
experiment, the consequences of which may not be realized for many years
to come.
4) The establishment of same-sex marriage will pose yet another threat to religious liberty.
This fear been constantly pointed out, and indeed already realized,
even before the invasive Obama HHS Contraceptive Mandate was foisted
upon us, a development that confirms that the full-frontal assault on
religious liberty in our nation is well underway. We’ve already seen
that if you oppose same-sex marriage, even for personal or religious
principles, you’ll quickly be labeled an intolerant bigot. And while
proponents insist that religious communities will not be required to
officiate at same-sex ceremonies, there are other impositions upon
religious institutions and private citizens that have already been
realized. The truth is that the homosexual lobby that seeks tolerance
for itself isn’t quite as generous in extending the same courtesy to
others.
5) The debate over homosexual marriage will again
distract our state leaders from other important issues and will further
divide our community. The State of Rhode Island faces enormous
challenges, especially in responding to the economic crisis that
continues to weigh heavily upon us. The stagnant economy has resulted in
a host of complex issues that demand the full attention of our state
leaders, issues such as unemployment, pension reform, tax rates, school
funding, homelessness, and funding of social services. Other issues such
as immigration, casino gambling and voting rights will also be on the
docket. Do we really want our representatives to be dragged into the
tiresome controversy over homosexual marriage yet again? The general
public will continue to be divided over this emotional issue with
accusations and angry rhetoric sure to follow. Do we need that again,
here and now?
So . . . there are several critical problems that
arise with the promotion of homosexual marriage. Proponents have already
argued that momentum is on their side, and since a few other states
recently approved the marriage of homosexual persons, we should do the
same. Well, Rhode Island has a long history of being independent, and
the fact that other states have adopted this ill-advised social
experiment doesn’t sway me at all.
Please be assured, dear readers, that if the debate over
same-sex marriage finds its way to the State House once again, the
Diocese of Providence, joined by its allies in our community, will be
fully engaged in the battle. We will work hard and pray hard for the
defeat of this immoral, misguided proposal that erodes the foundation of
our society and offends the moral values we cherish.
No comments:
Post a Comment