‘Normal’ is a subjective claim
Editor, The Times:
The arguments against gay marriage put forward by the Office of the Archbishop J. Peter Sartain [“Catholics should ask their bishops to stand up for marriage equality,” Opinion, April 14] do not hold up under scrutiny:
• “Place this matter before the voters of our state.” This is a case of equal protections under the law; the majority does not get to vote on the civil rights of the minority.
• “Marriage is a fundamental good in itself.” Then why not allow all members of our society to participate in it? I have many gay friends in committed, caring relationships that have outlasted blown-up straight marriages.
• “The crowning fruit of marriage is the bearing of children.” Gay parents have all the options available to them — artificial insemination, surrogates, adoption — that allow them to bring children into a loving family. And does that mean that childless-by-choice Catholic marriages are invalid?
Sadly, I think this is really about the “abomination factor” (i.e., straight folks being appalled by the “abnormal act” of gay intimacy).
But think about it, folks: When you were maybe middle-school age and someone told you what the “normal” straight procreative act was, I bet you said, “Gross! I will never do that!” Most of us get used to whatever is our “normal” over time.
— Nancy Martin Hughes, Burien
Archbishop should apologize
I applaud Catholics for Marriage Equality in Washington State for standing up to the Catholic hierarchy in a matter of civil rights.
It’s bad enough that the Catholic Church won’t bless these marriages with a Catholic ceremony, now that they are legal in Washington state. The least the Catholic bishops can do is welcome gay couples into our parishes.
After all, gay couples seeking to be married want to publicly commit to their relationships, the kind of lifelong relationships that Catholic teaching supports. I would have preferred the archbishop publicly apologize to gay couples for not yet being able to bless their marriages in the church.
— Mary Beth O’Neill, Seattle
Unions of same sex cannot be marriage, according to church
The authors (Barbara Guzzo and Kirby Brown) of the subject column, although claiming to be of the Catholic faith, are unaware of the purpose of marriage as defined by the Catholic Church.
According to item 2363 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, “The spouses’ union achieves the twofold end of marriage: the good of the spouses themselves and the transmission of life. These two meanings or values cannot be separated.”
Obviously, a union of persons of the same sex cannot be a marriage simply because they are incapable of performing the marriage act; and consequently cannot achieve the second end of marriage — the transmission of life.
They may join together for many reasons and that “union” is certainly entitled to the political and economic advantages that a married couple enjoy. However, that “union” is not and never can be a marriage.
— Daniel F. Healy, Seattle
Abuse of authority
My husband and I are both in our 60s and lifetime Catholics who are about at the end of our rope with the church continuing to overstep its boundary, moving from a spiritual arena into a political one.
The church was once a place to go for respite, spiritual renewal and guidance but it has become much like a stern parent, continually reprimanding, demanding and condemning her children.
After the reprehensible behavior of the hierarchy for the last 30 years regarding sexual abuse by priests, are we to believe the church has all the answers, specifically in this case regarding gay marriage? And are we to be OK with the archbishop using his influence to get signatures on a referendum to promote church teaching on a state ballot? I think not.
— Marianne and Claud Johnson, Bellingham
Article source: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/northwestvoices/2017994500_churchlet.html