1. It Is Not Marriage
Calling something marriage does not make it marriage. Marriage has
always been a covenant between a man and a woman which is by its nature
ordered toward the procreation and education of children and the unity
and wellbeing of the spouses.
The promoters of same-sex “marriage” propose something entirely
different. They propose the union between two men or two women. This
denies the self-evident biological, physiological, and psychological
differences between men and women which find their complementarity in
marriage. It also denies the specific primary purpose of marriage: the
perpetuation of the human race and the raising of children.
Two entirely different things cannot be considered the same thing.
2. It Violates Natural Law
Marriage is not just any relationship between human beings. It is a
relationship rooted in human nature and thus governed by natural law.
Natural law’s most elementary precept is that “good is to be done and
pursued, and evil is to be avoided.” By his natural reason, man can
perceive what is morally good or bad for him. Thus, he can know the end
or purpose of each of his acts and how it is morally wrong to transform
the means that help him accomplish an act into the act’s purpose.
Any situation which institutionalizes the circumvention of the
purpose of the sexual act violates natural law and the objective norm of
morality.
Being rooted in human nature, natural law is universal and immutable.
It applies to the entire human race, equally. It commands and forbids
consistently, everywhere and always. Saint Paul taught in the Epistle to
the Romans that the natural law is inscribed on the heart of every man.
(Rom. 2:14-15)
3. It Always Denies a Child Either a Father or a Mother
It is in the child’s best interests that he be raised under the
influence of his natural father and mother. This rule is confirmed by
the evident difficulties faced by the many children who are orphans or
are raised by a single parent, a relative, or a foster parent.
The unfortunate situation of these children will be the norm for all
children of a same-sex “marriage.” A child of a same-sex “marriage” will
always be deprived of either his natural mother or father. He will
necessarily be raised by one party who has no blood relationship with
him. He will always be deprived of either a mother or a father role
model.
Same-sex “marriage” ignores a child’s best interests.
4. It Validates and Promotes the Homosexual Lifestyle
In the name of the “family,” same-sex “marriage” serves to validate
not only such unions but the whole homosexual lifestyle in all its
bisexual and transgender variants.
Civil laws are structuring principles of man's life in society. As
such, they play a very important and sometimes decisive role in
influencing patterns of thought and behavior. They externally shape the
life of society, but also profoundly modify everyone’s perception and
evaluation of forms of behavior.
Legal recognition of same-sex “marriage” would necessarily obscure
certain basic moral values, devalue traditional marriage, and weaken
public morality.
5. It Turns a Moral Wrong into a Civil Right
Homosexual activists argue that same-sex “marriage” is a civil rights
issue similar to the struggle for racial equality in the 1960s. This
is false.
First
of all, sexual behavior and race are essentially different realities. A
man and a woman wanting to marry may be different in their
characteristics: one may be black, the other white; one rich, the other
poor; or one tall, the other short. None of these differences are
insurmountable obstacles to marriage. The two individuals are still man
and woman, and thus the requirements of nature are respected.
Same-sex “marriage” opposes nature. Two individuals of the same sex,
regardless of their race, wealth, stature, erudition or fame, will never
be able to marry because of an insurmountable biological impossibility.
Secondly, inherited and unchangeable racial traits cannot be compared
with non-genetic and changeable behavior. There is simply no analogy
between the interracial marriage of a man and a woman and the “marriage”
between two individuals of the same sex.
6. It Does Not Create a Family but a Naturally Sterile Union
Traditional marriage is usually so fecund that those who would
frustrate its end must do violence to nature to prevent the birth of
children by using contraception. It naturally tends to create families.
On the contrary, same-sex “marriage” is intrinsically sterile. If the
“spouses” want a child, they must circumvent nature by costly and
artificial means or employ surrogates. The natural tendency of such a
union is not to create families.
Therefore, we cannot call a same-sex union marriage and give it the benefits of true marriage.
7. It Defeats the State’s Purpose of Benefiting Marriage
One of the main reasons why the State bestows numerous benefits on
marriage is that by its very nature and design, marriage provides the
normal conditions for a stable, affectionate, and moral atmosphere that
is beneficial to the upbringing of children—all fruit of the mutual
affection of the parents. This aids in perpetuating the nation and
strengthening society, an evident interest of the State.
Homosexual “marriage” does not provide such conditions. Its primary
purpose, objectively speaking, is the personal gratification of two
individuals whose union is sterile by nature. It is not entitled,
therefore, to the protection the State extends to true marriage.
8. It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society
By legalizing same-sex “marriage,” the State becomes its official and
active promoter. The State calls on public officials to officiate at
the new civil ceremony, orders public schools to teach its acceptability
to children, and punishes any state employee who expresses disapproval.
In the private sphere, objecting parents will see their children
exposed more than ever to this new “morality,” businesses offering
wedding services will be forced to provide them for same-sex unions, and
rental property owners will have to agree to accept same-sex couples as
tenants.
In every situation where marriage affects society, the State will
expect Christians and all people of good will to betray their
consciences by condoning, through silence or act, an attack on the
natural order and Christian morality.
9. It Is the Cutting Edge of the Sexual Revolution
In the 1960s, society was pressured to accept all kinds of immoral
sexual relationships between men and women. Today we are seeing a new
sexual revolution where society is being asked to accept sodomy and
same-sex “marriage.”
If homosexual “marriage” is universally accepted as the present step
in sexual “freedom,” what logical arguments can be used to stop the next
steps of incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and other forms of unnatural
behavior? Indeed, radical elements of certain “avant garde” subcultures
are already advocating such aberrations.
The railroading of same-sex “marriage” on the American people makes
increasingly clear what homosexual activist Paul Varnell wrote in the
Chicago Free Press:
"The gay movement, whether we
acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual
liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people's
view of homosexuality."
10. It Offends God
This
is the most important reason. Whenever one violates the natural moral
order established by God, one sins and offends God. Same-sex “marriage”
does just this. Accordingly, anyone who professes to love God must be
opposed to it.
Marriage is not the creature of any State. Rather, it was established
by God in Paradise for our first parents, Adam and Eve. As we read in
the Book of Genesis: “God created man in His image; in the Divine image
he created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them,
saying: ‘Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.’” (Gen.
1:28-29)
The same was taught by Our Savior Jesus Christ: “From the beginning
of the creation, God made them male and female. For this cause a man
shall leave his father and mother; and shall cleave to his wife.” (Mark
10:6-7).
Genesis also teaches how God punished Sodom and Gomorrah for the sin
of homosexuality: “The Lord rained down sulphurous fire upon Sodom and
Gomorrah. He overthrew those cities and the whole Plain, together with
the inhabitants of the cities and the produce of the soil.” (Gen.
19:24-25)
By TFP Student Action
Taking a Principled not a Personal Stand
In writing this statement, we have no intention to defame or
disparage anyone. We are not moved by personal hatred against any
individual. In intellectually opposing individuals or organizations
promoting the homosexual agenda, our only intent is the defense of
traditional marriage, the family, and the precious remnants of Christian
civilization.
As practicing Catholics, we are filled with compassion and pray for
those who struggle against unrelenting and violent temptation to
homosexual sin. We pray for those who fall into homosexual sin out of
human weakness, that God may assist them with His grace.
We are conscious of the enormous difference between these individuals
who struggle with their weakness and strive to overcome it and others
who transform their sin into a reason for pride and try to impose their
lifestyle on society as a whole, in flagrant opposition to traditional
Christian morality and natural law. However, we pray for these too.
We pray also for the judges, legislators and government officials who
in one way or another take steps that favor homosexuality and same-sex
“marriage.” We do not judge their intentions, interior dispositions, or
personal motivations.
We reject and condemn any violence. We simply exercise our liberty as
children of God (Rom. 8:21) and our constitutional rights to free
speech and the candid, unapologetic and unashamed public display of our
Catholic faith. We oppose arguments with arguments. To the arguments in
favor of homosexuality and same-sex “marriage” we respond with arguments
based on right reason, natural law and Divine Revelation.
In a polemical statement like this, it is possible that one or
another formulation may be perceived as excessive or ironic. Such is not
our intention.