This morning, the Supreme Court of the United States released a decision making Same-sex "marriage" legal in all 50 states. This is wrong, and for several reasons. This can clearly be seen through a proper understanding of Human Nature and Human Love.
What is a human being? A human being is a rational animal. As animal, humans engage in the reproductive act out of a natural urge for the preservation of the species, just like the rest of the animal kingdom. This can only be done when a male comes into union with a female. By this reasoning alone, Same-sex encounters are a perversion of man's animality.
Same-sex marriage is not only a perversion of man's animality, but also of his rationality. As rational, the reproductive act is elevated to a higher level. The rational faculty of man allows him to take hold of his nature in freedom. Freedom, properly speaking, is not the ability to do what one wants. It is the ability to choose the good. What is Good. First and foremost, God is Good. God is the author of nature, and if man is ordered to that which is good, good acts are only those that coincide with nature. Love arises from this proper freedom, as it is the desire for the good of another. Human Love is most fully realized within the context of marriage. Humans engage not only in a physical union through the reproductive act, they engage in a complete union, a union of two persons through marriage. For Humans, the reproductive act is properly reserved for marriage, and due to the nature of said act the union in marriage is properly between one man and one woman for life. Proponents of same-sex "marriage", despite the signs of nature willingly choose to act in an unnatural way, therefore perverting both animality and rationality.
Just as clarifier, same-sex attraction does exist but it is not nature, it is a frustration to nature. Just as blindness is a frustration of man's natural ability to see, homosexuality also results from a frustration, most likely in man's desire to procreate. If one finds themselves attracted to the same gender, that does not mean that it is part of their nature. It means there is something wrong.
Apart from being morally wrong, the Supreme Court went beyond its authority today. Chief Justice John Roberts said the following. "This court is not a legislature. Whether same-sex marriage is a good idea should be of no concern to us. Under the Constitution, judges have power to say what the law is, not what it should be."
To close, I leave the following quote from Eusebius of Caesarea:
Having forbidden all unlawful marriage, and all unseemly practice, and the union of women with women and men with men, he [God] adds: ‘Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for in all these things the nations were defiled, which I will drive out before you. And the land was polluted, and I have recompensed [their] iniquity upon it, and the land is grieved with them that dwell upon it’ [Lev. 18:24–25]" (Proof of the Gospel 4:10 [A.D. 319]).
Catholics, Christians, raise your voices. Do not let this evil stand. Fight for truth.
Also, I'm linking an article from the USCCB that everyone should read. http://www.usccb.org/news/2015/15-103.cfm
Please comment and share. This message needs to get out there.
Good to see you blogging again. I'll comment a little later.
ReplyDeleteBefore I begin, let me say that everything I write should be prefaced by "In my opinion," "I think," "As I see it" or something like that.
ReplyDeleteWe Catholics need to differentiate between marriage and Holy Matrimony. It's the right of any religion to define Matrimony as it sees fit. Our Church says that it's one man/one woman. I'll not get into defending or attacking that definition. As a Catholic, I accept it and live by it.
The Supreme Court decision tackles the legal and civil definition of marriage. While they're related, for me, marriage and Holy Matrimony are not the same thing.
I have many gay friends some of whom are legally married. I was honored to be a guest at one of their weddings.The recognition of their unions brings equality in many areas. I have one friend who was barred from seeing his dying partner in a hospital because he wasn't "family." That won't happen anymore. The ruling also allows such mundane things as filing a joint income tax return. Is that a big deal? Probably not -- unless you were never able to do it in the past. I applaud anything which offers inclusion to more people.
Ask anybody who's been married for any length of time, Ryan. It's not always easy. There is, however the realization in a marriage that there is a permanence and commitment there which is stronger than any disagreement. The divorce rate in this country is very high. Seems that straight couples aren't doing as well as they could with their lifetime vows. I really don't think that legalizing same-sex marriage will bring about the dire straits which some are predicting.
As for the court overstepping its authority, I don't pretend to be qualified to comment on that. If SCOTUS did, there are remedies (however unlikely to be taken) for that.
How about doing a blog entry on "Laudate si'?" I seem to be the only one of my Catholic friends who's read (a lot of) it and would like to discuss.
Hope that you're having a good summer and that you're not wilting in the Kansas heat.
I think that this our first "major disagreement." I guess that we could march side-by-side in a Pro-Life demonstration but not the Gay Pride parade, eh? Know what? That's OK.
Just a few clarifications, what I have presented comes from an ancient philosophical tradition. These views predate Catholic theology.
DeleteNow I think the real differentiation should be between the terms Marriage and Civil Union. What Homosexual couples were fighting for is a Civil Union. I have no problem with them wanting the same rights that men and women experience; my problem is that the Supreme Court redefined Marriage, an ancient practice that far predates this nation and all nations on earth. The Supreme Court does not have the authority to do that.
I adhere firmly to the ancient philosophical tradition laid out by Aristotle and further enlightened by Catholic scholars like Aquinas. According to that tradition, Homosexual acts are a perversion of the law of nature, and there is no argument that comes close to overturning that. That being said, Homosexuals are persons and should be treated with the dignity and respect that a person deserves. But same-sex attraction, as I said before, is a frustration of man's nature, and as a frustration it should not be embraced.
I'll think about a post on Laudate si, I have to read it first.
Thanks for the clarification, Ryan.
ReplyDeleteWe agree that the same words shouldn't be used for gay and straight marriages. One of the problem I have with "Civil Union" is that it sounds cold -- like a business arrangement. The same is true of "Domestic Partnership." My other concern is that gays aren't comfortable with those terms. When People with Far Eastern roots decided that they didn't want to be called "Oriental," we learned to use the term "Asian" when referring to them. I think that it's sort of the same thing here. I have no problem with using "marriage" for civil/legal items and "matrimony" for religious ones.If those distinctions don't work for people, we need to find some which do without demeaning anyone or being insensitive.
Right, you should probably read the encyclical before you comment on it. LOL!
Have a great day and a great Mass.
Are you gay?
ReplyDeleteI'm willing to bet that if you were, you'd neither see your homosexuality -- especially when it allows you to finally fall in love with a nother person -- to be neither against "animality" or "rationality."
Also, the animal kingdom includes homosexuality. Its a bit strange to compare human relationships to animals when they in fact do engage in homosexual behavior. The vast majority of animals, including humans, may be attracted to members of the opposite sex so that reproduction and survival of the species can continue. But a majority does not necessitate what is normal, right, or the truth.
Our rationality is supposed to align ourselves with the Good that God has in mind for us. I agree. But saying homosexuality is in and of itself sinful leads to a profound question: Then why is a good chunk of humanity homosexual? Why do so many people find that their homosexuality to be a means of relating to other people, of expressing and sharing love with another person? The Church's requirement for celibacy for those who are homosexual is a cause for loneliness and much struggle for many. For homosexuals, this teaching certainly does not seem like fulfillment or reaching the good God wants for them. I think it could be well argued that our openness to same-sex relationships would be entirely good for the human person, fostering sacrifice, self-giving, committment, and family life.
No Patric, I am not Gay. But I also know that there a number of good Catholic people who suffer from Same-Sex attraction who agree with my point of view.
DeleteWhat I now want to do is look at things as God intended them to be. God created all creatures, both the rational and the non-rational. Male and Female he created them. To them he commanded to be fruitful and multiply. Human Sexuality was created in the Garden for the sake of unity and procreation. Homosexual activity is a violation of this purpose, and it is a result of that little thought that the Devil gives us: I can do whatever I want.
God has shown already that Homosexual behavior is sinful. Ever hear of the sin of sodom, or sodomy. Basically, Sodomy is any act of non-procreative sex, which includes homosexual activity. Sodom was punished for her sin; God burnt the city to the ground.
Now Same-Sex attraction however, as I said, is not sinful. It is a frustration. All frustrations of nature are due to the fall of man. Sin disrupted the natural order that was established by God, and thus nature was perverted. These perversions/frustrations have continued throughout the generations, in both man and animal, the first and foremost perversion being death. Same-Sex attraction is just another frustration.
As for homosexuality in animals, studies of individual animals show that those who do engage in homosexual activity do not have a long lasting disposition to do so and in short time they return to heterosexual activity.
Finally, what I have presented has been the teaching of the Church since Christ founded it. It is doctrine, and an infallible truth passed down in the Church by the power and protection of the Holy Spirit. And an infallible truth cannot be overturned.
Just another link that is important to this conversation.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.catholic.com/blog/trent-horn/marriage-has-been-redefined-now-what
Also some evidence from the catechism:
ReplyDelete2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
Chicago's Archbishop Cupich has made the point which I was trying to make the other day. The "Supreme Court had redefined civil marriage which has no bearing on the Catholic sacrament of matrimony."
ReplyDeletehttp://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-archbishop-cupich-supreme-court-met-20150628-story.html
Thanks for sharing Tom. Safe to say we are in complete agreement on this one too. Granted I still think this decision should have been in the hands of the state legislatures, but as of now I can't do anything to change that.
Delete