My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2004

« This is SO Gay!(*) | Main | Virginia Apologizes for Slavery »



I remember the first weeks of the Clinton administration--so well intentioned, so exciting, ultimately so disappointing and chaotic and problematic. They wanted to accomplish so much and they retreated from it all. DADT was visited upon us like a plague. Fortunately Rep. Marty Meehan is trying now with bipartisan support to kill DADT once and for all.


I'm not so sure bigotry is the right term to use when referring to the view of some religions on the marriage of same-sex couples.

As regards the Catholic church, canon law dictates that sexual relations should be between married couples for the purpose of procreation. The official position is that any other form of sexual relations is a mortal sin.

This includes masturbation and even sex with your spouse where an attempt is made to prevent a possible pregnancy.

This includes Catholic marriage between a man and a woman who intend in advance of the marriage never to have children.

If you take the issue of whether or not the church approves of homosexuality out of the equation, there's still a problem, same-sex marriage would be an issue because there would never be a possibility of children.

This position gives rise to other questions as well, like would the church bless a marriage where one of the persons was known in advance to be irreversibly infertile?

The Catholic church's position on homosexual marriage is completely consistent with other positions that are not targeted at same-sex couples.

The official position of the Catholic church is also that you can be forgiven for nearly anything, literally. If I were to kill someone, cut them up and bury them in my back yard, then go to confession and ask for absolution, I would be absolved, even absent any legal prosecution, and the confidentiality of my confession would be protected under the law.

The failings in some of these positions are illustrated most dramatically with all these sexual abuse cases involving priests.

I'm not in any way defending these positions, but I believe firmly it's not bigotry at play in this case.


Okay, I promise never to attempt to be married in a Catholic Church. Obviously, having or not having children is not a concern of secular marriage. To use that canard as a cover for denying same-sex couples the right to marry is, well, exactly that: a canard.

Why are Christians so obsessed with Gay sex? They embrace divorce with such enthusiasm, even after Jesus denounced it, specifically, but go apoplectic on the subject of homosexuality, which Jesus didn't think important enough to even mention.

These days, same-sex couples are as likely to have children as opposite-sex couples. Last summer the California Supreme Court dealt with at least three variations of a custody fight between same-sex couples where no problem would exist if the couples had been able to be legally married.

It is about the children. Children have a right to married parents.

If the Catholic Church were a true vehicle of morality, it would not be fighting the rights of anyone to be married, but would be championing those rights.


I can't tell by your comment about Christians being obsessed with gay sex whether or not you are including Catholics in that mix, but I most definitely don't find the Catholic church to be obsessive on that topic.

The Catholic church doesn't like sex that is outside of marriage and excludes the possibility of procreation, whether the participants be heterosexual or homosexual.

The Catholic church allows divorce, but does not embrace it. Re-marriage is blessed by the church only if those involved are able to show sufficient cause for anullment.

I do not see the position of the Catholic church on marriage as targeting same-sex couples. The issues run way deeper than that.

The prohibition against gays becoming priests, now that's a different matter entirely...

The comments to this entry are closed.