President Obama Declares War on Marriage and, by implication, the Catholic Church
The 'so-called' Defense of Marriage Act? That 'so-called' is the sound of contempt toward the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim understanding of marriage.
The President told the participants at the 'Human Rights Campaign' Banquet: 'You will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognize relationships between two men or two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman.'
PrintWASHINGTON, DC (Inside Catholic) - President Obama, the man trusted by the USCCB to do the "right thing" on health care, has declared war on marriage and, by implication, the Catholic Church.
Speaking to the nation's leading homosexual rights lobbying group, the Human Rights Campaign, Obama said:
"You will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognize relationships between two men or two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman".
As Deacon Keith Fournier reports and comments, "The leading voice for this Cultural Revolution is now President Barack Obama."
The question becomes whether or not the leadership of the Catholic Church, both bishops and laity, are going to respond vigorously and loudly to Obama's direct challenge to one of its non-negotiable teachings.
How can the USCCB remain silent when the President of the United States said he wants Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act?
"I support ensuring that committed gay couples have the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country. I believe strongly in stopping laws designed to take rights away and passing laws that extend equal rights to gay couples. I've required all agencies in the federal government to extend as many federal benefits as possible to LCBT families as the current law allows. And I've called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act and to pass the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act. And we must all stand together against divisive and deceptive efforts to feed people's lingering fears for political and ideological gain".
The "so-called" Defense of Marriage Act? That "so-called" is the sound of contempt toward the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim understanding of marriage. As Deacon Fournier commented, "We now stand in a precarious place in the nation we love."
Cardinal George recently said of Obama, "Some of his policies, we think, are simply wrong," and adds, "What must be done is to criticize the politics of the government." I have yet to hear the bishops take up this latest attack on core Catholic belief, but I assume some sort of response is forthcoming.
At some point in the near future, one individual bishop after another will begin to speak out on the "Cultural Revolution" being lead by Obama, and more and more this nation's Catholics will recognize the imminent and unprecedented danger of the Obama administration.
The bishops' desire for health care and immigration reform will then no longer moderate their public criticism of Obama's aggressive efforts to redefine marriage and make abortion a federal entitlement.
Speaking to the nation's leading homosexual rights lobbying group, the Human Rights Campaign, Obama said:
"You will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognize relationships between two men or two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman".
As Deacon Keith Fournier reports and comments, "The leading voice for this Cultural Revolution is now President Barack Obama."
The question becomes whether or not the leadership of the Catholic Church, both bishops and laity, are going to respond vigorously and loudly to Obama's direct challenge to one of its non-negotiable teachings.
How can the USCCB remain silent when the President of the United States said he wants Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act?
"I support ensuring that committed gay couples have the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country. I believe strongly in stopping laws designed to take rights away and passing laws that extend equal rights to gay couples. I've required all agencies in the federal government to extend as many federal benefits as possible to LCBT families as the current law allows. And I've called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act and to pass the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act. And we must all stand together against divisive and deceptive efforts to feed people's lingering fears for political and ideological gain".
The "so-called" Defense of Marriage Act? That "so-called" is the sound of contempt toward the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim understanding of marriage. As Deacon Fournier commented, "We now stand in a precarious place in the nation we love."
Cardinal George recently said of Obama, "Some of his policies, we think, are simply wrong," and adds, "What must be done is to criticize the politics of the government." I have yet to hear the bishops take up this latest attack on core Catholic belief, but I assume some sort of response is forthcoming.
At some point in the near future, one individual bishop after another will begin to speak out on the "Cultural Revolution" being lead by Obama, and more and more this nation's Catholics will recognize the imminent and unprecedented danger of the Obama administration.
The bishops' desire for health care and immigration reform will then no longer moderate their public criticism of Obama's aggressive efforts to redefine marriage and make abortion a federal entitlement.
- - -
The mission of InsideCatholic.com is to be a voice for authentic Catholicism in the public square.We believe that truth is both attractive and compelling and that in the marketplace of ideas, it will invariably win out.
Keywords:
NEWSLETTERS »
Rate This Article
113 Comments
Leave a Comment
More Politics & Policy News
- The Obama HHS 'Compromise' Switches the Tiger for the Lion
- Santorum Surges: Fr Longenecker Asks 'What is a Santorum Catholic?'
- Rick Santorum Resets the Race: Wins Missouri, Minnesota, Colorado and a Path to the Nomination
- Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg tells Egypt: Don't use the U.S. Constitution as a model
- More control on banana sales than on conventional arms
- White House hints it's willing to work with Catholic organizations on mandated contraceptives....Maybe
- President Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast. Catholics Won't Get Fooled Again
- Leaders vow to harness voting power of nation's Catholics
- U.S. federal judge says he can't block Texas sonogram law
Featured News
- Catholics Go To Court To Resist Unjust HHS Edict. The Rising Tide of Catholic Resistance
- Abp. Dolan: Obama needs to 'back out of intruding into the internal life of a church'
- 49 states accept $25 billion foreclosure-abuse settlement
- Brain plaque, responsible for Alzheimer's successfully broken up in mice
- Santorum Surges: Fr Longenecker Asks 'What is a Santorum Catholic?'
- US Bishops Renew Their Opposition, Call for Rescission of HHS Mandate
- Preparing for Lent: Learning to Pray, Love, and Live Our Lives in Communion with God
- Saudi Arabia will buy nukes if Iran tests A-bomb, report says
- Plan B and Ella: Morning After Contraceptives Can Induce Abortion
Latest Videos »
Newsletter Sign Up »
Daily Readings »
Reading 1, First Kings 12:26-32; 13:33-34
Jeroboam thought to himself, 'As things are, the kingdom will revert to the House of David. If this people continues ... Read all
Responsorial Psalm, Psalms 106:6-7, 19-20, 21-22
Like our ancestors, we have sinned, we have acted wickedly, guiltily; our ancestors in Egypt never grasped the meaning ... Read all
Gospel, Mark 8:1-10
And now once again a great crowd had gathered, and they had nothing to eat. So he called his disciples to him and said ... Read all
Most Popular »
Featured Book
The Dialogues of Saint ...
Having witnessed the string of disasters that shattered his beloved Italy in the 6th century, Pope Saint Gregory the Great set ... Featured Product
Cross Rings - Tungsten ...
.jpg)
Designed to last an eternity, these Catholic Tungsten Wedding Bands combine the strength of tungsten carbide with the sanctity of ... 
Countries making profit off of Sudanese conflict
Brain plaque successfully broken up in mice
Groups calls for bigger restrictions on arms sales
Greece finally agrees on new austerity measures
Inroads made during revolution may be transient
Switches tiger in lieu of lion
Don't model your country on U.S. constitution
Syrian towns battered by government forces
Arms race in Mideast if Iran tests bomb
Native people want voice in government
Christian minority persecuted in Egypt
White House should stay out of church policy
Chromosome may be link to heart disease in men
Pennsylvania college sells pill in vending machine
When I got married I was greatly offended that I was required to get a "license" from the state. The state has no business attempting to define or regulate a sacrament. An individual or should be able to establish a contract with another for the purpose of shared domecile or inheritance or hospital visits or any other legal benefits of marriage without any reference to sexual relationship or marriage. Married (sacramentally) people could enter into it as could homosexuals or others not in sexual relationships and it wouldn't be marriage!
Obama is aware of how many votes he would lose... Andrew: I am not Catholic, but I know many and they are NOT hateful. Their stance on homosexuality is to be as respectful as possible because God did create us all and He will be the one to judge in the end.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. Gilbert K. Chesterton
Patrick Ransdell and Noel If you could you won't find hatred at the Courage Apostolate Website. Be my guest and stop on over and check it out you might be surprised at what you will find there. Love in Christ
Has anyone thought about what homosexual "union" actually means? How is this union accomplished? Homosexual activity is full of perversion of every kind, promiscuousness, and is very often violent. It is a world that most of us would find extremely repugnant if ever we dared to enter its domain. Those who are so quick to spout "tolerance!" often have no idea what they are tolerating. Homosexual "union" is in no way equivalent to marital fidelity, or even to extra-marital or pre-marital heterosexual unions. We should pray for our brothers and sisters who are trapped in the darkness and lies of homosexuality.
Noel so beautifully spoken
Thank you
It is time that we wake up and realize that homosexuality is not a disease, is not an illness or perversion of any sort, and that God created these human beings just as He created heterosexuals. Committed relationships of homosexuals neither negates nor diminishes heterosexual marriages. Fear, hate, ignorance, and violence are the only things that will destroy the Catholic faithful and our relationship with our Father.
If the primary purpose of marriage is to beget children, shall we therefore prohibit women who are beyond child-bearing age from getting married? Or does marriage mean more than bearing children? And why do Catholics get upset if other faiths define marriage differently than them? Other faiths define the Eucharist different than Catholics, but other faiths are not prohibited by federal law from performing the Eucharist. Federal law should not be used as a tool to foist Catholic doctrine onto a nation of mixed faiths.
Dear Classylady, You are dead right. We are living in the End Times. Praise God for Your Wisdom. The time of the Gentiles is up. Nixon
If our President believe he can unite our nation with these kind of principles he is saddly mistaken and all I can do is pray that someday, God will rectify these mistakes.
As a Catholic Republican, isn't it odd that so many of my brethren seek to get all hot and bothered about Obama AFTER they have voted FOR him? Bizarre might be a better word!
The bible commands us to love our neighbours as ourselves and that is what the catholics are doing. You guys are doing a great job and i hope other christian denominations who have not said anything about this will also speak up and save the souls of our brothers and sisters whether it will affect us or not. GREAT JOB!
It is written that in the end times, a sure sign of sickness in the population will be the acceptance of homosexuality. So are we living in the End Times?
Mashael If you get a chance go over to the Courage Apostolate. Yes were aware of separation of Church and State but were also aware that people came to this country to escape religous persecution as well. Now we have religious persecution today in the name of secularism. We do respect people's rights. We do not have to give up what we believe just for the status quo either. Love in Christ.
Please include Hindu, Jain, Buddhist along with Jewish, Christian, Muslim understanding of marriage.
As far as I know, the Constitution DOES ENSURE separation of State and Church, is this a sudden call for integration? Or what I would call another "Virtue-Like Vice"? As a Muslim, I understand where believers of the Holy Books stand on this issue, but this is just what they believe, not what they are entitled to impose on others! This is a free choice of life, and no matter what you guys believe, it doesn't give you the right to pass judgements and deny rights just because you disagree. Just live and let live.
What do you base that on Mike? I was just wondering.
While medical research seems to point to a continuum of difference between male and female,(rather than two completely separate conditions) the attraction of two people of the same sex to one another has to be recognised as a possibility, and if two such people want to celebrate that union or partnership it seems unfair to deny them that right. but the fact remains that what we know as marriage is the union of two people of different genders whose faithfulness to each other is intended not only for their enjoyment but also for the protection of their children - and of the interests of the spouses as they grow older and one or other perhaps becomes ill. I can see no reason why the laws of our various countries should not allow for mutual ownership in partnership of any two people, with mutual recognition of e.g. insurance benefits - but why this needs to be called marriage when it doesn't fit the definition is what puzzles me. If a brother and sister, or two brothers or just two friends are sharing a home and looking after each other, it should be possible to share also mutual responsibilities and inherit their joint property if one dies - but that does not constitute a marriage either, nor can I see anyone claiming that it is. By all means a lasting and formalised union - much better than the partner-swapping that seems to be so common among so many heterosexuals today. It is only the name I would quibble about. Families still need the protection of the law.
America is confusing rights and responsibilities. Marriage is a responsibility,not a right,as it is a vocation of lifetime fidelity,husband to wife,wife to husband,as children are defenseless offspring of these relationships,they should be insured the fidelity of their parents. They deserve the commitment of a man and a woman because they are the offspring of their physical and spiritual love. Man ,woman,child =family. This is simple mathematics. In mathematics there is simply a right and wrong answer. Obamamatics? New math? Hardly! He is wrong. Gay marriage does not compute!
I don't see anything in these comments about the NATURAL LAW. The non-religious meaning of the word "marriage" is a permanent relationship between a man and a woman in which a child may be begotten. This is still the only purely NATURAL way a child can be conceived. "Marriage" has been protected precisely to protect the rights of the NATURAL human family nucleus of all societies: it takes a man and a woman, a mother and a father to NATURALLY bring forth a child. This is why LGBT "unions" are essentially different and for this reason this "relationship" should be given a different name.
Legalizing same-sex marriage DOES NOT: 1 - threaten my marriage, or 2 - threaten my church. No church would be required to marry anyone. A pastor would be able to refuse, just like they refuse to today under other circumstances.
Just because your son does not father children does not mean he stops contributing to your progeny. Your son can adopt children. Or he can help in the raising of his nephews and nieces. Families with extra adults around to take care of aging parents, support the family, and help out in child raising are actually stronger than families where all the adults are busy with their own kids.
May God forbid if my son were to get married with another man and stop my line of progeny and end the race. I pray for President Obama such may not be seen by him in his family and in his times. I also pray that he may reconsider his stand on marriage and human race.
Write your Reps and tell them you want our Churches protected against this nonsense.
Liz God Bless you. Im not worried about whether the horse got to water or not my friend Im worried about shutting up and not letting them know about the Courage Apostolate. Leading them to water is in our dear Lord's hands and our prayers even if it takes years. If they dont get to water then Im sorry to say the dark one gets them and I feel sorrow for them. As Christ said, Father they know not what they do. Same yesterday, today and tomorrow. It took Agustine's mother over 17 years to get her son to water. Again its the in the Lord and Holy Spirits hands. Hope the good Lord gave me some wisdom on the subject. Thanks for saying will pray for you to. Im not worried about the liberals or anybody Im worried about the one who can destroy the soul. PEACE.
All of this was predicted prior to the election. Obama made these promises, next will be the promise that was made to Planned Parenthood. People voted for change, I dont think this is the change many had in mind, but now it is too late. May God have mercy.
Jean: God love you!!! What you don't understand is that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink!! Most of the dissenters on here are typical of the liberal left - only their opinion counts. You are in my prayers.
Kristyn, you are naive if you think the homosexual crowd will be satisfied with civil unions or state sanctioned marriage. Congress just passed a "hate crimes" bill (they had to sneak it in attached to a military funding bill). We will soon be prosecuted for speaking out against homosexuality, and churches will be prosecuted for denying weddings to them. It is already happening in Canada and elsewhere. If you wait until then to oppose it, you will be to late! Wake up!
How displeased our Lord will be that even Christians accept this distorted way of life. I pray fervently that this is discouraged and openly rebuked before it creeps into other countries - i doubt i can live in such a society. Lord have mercy.
Kristyn, exactly. Liz, I don't think Kristyn was condoning civil unions. She just doesn't think that the government should have a role in enforcing certain moralities.
Re: Courage Apostolate If Catholic News will be so kind to repeat this: ANYONE HEAR IF THEY GET A CHANCE PLEASE GO OVER TO THE COURAGE APOSTOLATE IF THEY DIDNT SEE MY NOTICE HERE IN THE OPINIONS.
Kristyn: you mean well but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Homosexual behavior is a sin against God; it is morally wrong - even an aethist who believes in natural or moral law would tell you that. No, Catholics cannot condone civil unions of any kind - homosexual or heterosexual. Sex outside of marriage is a sin regardless of who is committing it. And while we must embrace homosexuals as our brothers and sisters in Christ, we cannot condone their sin.
President Obama says that homosexual marriage is a right of homosexuals. God says that homosexual relationships, let alone homosexual marriages, are very sinful. Whom would you believe? President Obama or God? President Obama says that the arguments in defense of traditional marriage are worn out. God says marriage is only between a man and a woman. Who is right? President Obama or God? President Obama claims to be a Christian. Yet he opposes vehemently many of the major moral tenets of Christianity. God says you shall not murder. Yet Obama promotes vigorously the murder of unborn babies - and even the murder of partially born babies. God says that marriage is meant only to be between a man and a woman. Yet Obama promotes and defends the very sinful homosexual lifestyle and the so-called right to homosexual marriage. Clearly, Obama is a Christian is name only. But his heart, mind, and will are in conformity with that of the Devil or the anti-Christ. Homosexuals say that homosexuality is a normal and good thing. God says that homosexuality is a major form of moral depravity. Whom should we believe? The activist homosexuals or God?
My how satan has stepped up the rhetoric and vitriol against the Church. Could someone explain the moral good derived from the deliberate misuse of a biological function simply to satisfy ones lust.
There is a difference between the state recognizing civil unions or "marriage" between two men or two women and the government telling the church that they must allow this type of marriage. There is a reason we have a separation of church and state. I would never support the church allowing homosexual marriage, however this is not what the government is pushing for. I think that we as Catholics recognize the difference between a civil union and marriage in the eyes of God - isn't this all that matters? I do not believe that these civil unions will diminish the sacredness of the sacrament of marriage. When the government starts telling the Church what it has to allow, that is when I will start to have a problem with this.
This is yet another example why I'm not Catholic anymore. You people make me sick.
Hypocrisy at its finest. One minute a Catholic would smite a person for being a "homosexual" (which by the way is newly coined phrase ... they have not existed throughout history, it is only because we have needed to define a group as such that we can look through history and say for example "Alexander the Great was 'Gay' ") and then turn around say "thou shalt not judge". Just like they say they are "PRO-LIFE" then turn around and support the "War On Terror". I wonder what Jesus, and founders of all religions, would think if they could live a day in today's society. To say that a human doesn't deserve to think and live the way they feel is "good" ... that means without physical harm to others ... is simply disgusting, and I'm sad to call you my fellow human. This is the reason why oppression of "peoples" will never go away; this is the reason why "paradise on earth" will never exist.
I am proud to be a new Catholic and appreciate this article as well as the others I read on this website. Keep the info coming. It is very helpful. I pray that we can all stand firm until the end!
Are you deliberately blinding yourself to what's going on in Canada? Are preachers not being penalized for speaking on their religious beliefs? Are catholic organizations not being attacked in other countries for so-called "discrimination"? No, that could never happen here. This is America So, Tom is there no such thing as any of our founding fathers describing marriage as a natural human relationship between a woman and a man outside of the civil law? (Hm... the same argument was used to defend abortion and slavery) Then there never was any thought that a man and a woman is the most stable of environments for the beginning of all relationships. If husband and wife have no more bond then two men, then why mother or father between child? Why we can see this natural bond has already been weakened in our society. Why then, even feel the natural bond of one for his country. a tangled web is weaved when we first practice deception. You called me out, Tom My thought are just too worn out. If it means everything, it means nothing. Is it alarmist when a federal supreme court justice posits the end game to be equality for every other variation of sexual activity? Have not some of our legislators said the same? Tom, what is your definition of sexual orientation, anyway. Is it just homosexual couples? Isn't that bigoted? Is it alarmist deception when my kid comes home from school talking about the gay speaker in his 20's involved with a 15 year old without any thought of my consent? Is it the state's job to indoctrinate my child against my religious beliefs? Should he be penalized and have to do more work if he opts out of class? Oh that could never happen, because that would be against the law. Well, Tom, it's happening. Is it alarmist when a man who lives nearby has sex with a deer carcass and is defended by a top PETA lawyer? (yeah, they tried to change the definition of "animal" too) Well, Tom, it's happening. Who is deliberately blind here? Like when Nero turned his head away to the atrocities he ordered, will this president send in his lions into this political circus? By the way, what is the federal definition of sexual orientation? That could mean an awful lot of different things to different people. Maybe it will depend on the judge and what kind of creative definition suits his purpose.
It is incredibly sad to see so many good Catholics fooled by silver tongues. By appealing to what is good in you, you are being deceived by that which is evil. Tolerance and diversity can be desirable when used as verbs but when called to be nouns they are like altars before which you worship. If "tolerence" becomes that which is desirable then you become blind to that which you are tolerating. All means are justified because you only see the end and you will accept anything in the name of it. Please look beyond that which seems to be good and search for that which really is.
Dear Catholic Online, I would suggest that most of the comments posted on this thread violate your "terms of service" ie: patently false concerning the teaching of the Magesterium, overtly anti-Catholic, and intended to mislead readers as to what the Catholic Church teaches.
To the "irreligious" leftist "J" who wants the "religious right" kicked into the gutter - FYI Jesus and His Church, the Catholic Church ARE protecting the unborn, all helpless children and elderly and championing the santity of marriage between a man and a woman.
Jonathan - I disagree with one of your statements .. "1. "Obama" is not declaring war on marriage or the Catholic Church, what he is saying is the will of the majority of Americans." Is that so .... then let us put it to a vote! The politians in most states will not allow it. Look what happened in California, were there is a very high population of Homosexuals. I am willing to bet that only a vocial minority thinks that way. Alan
Bush let the djinni out of the bottle by invading Iraq, not heeding John Paul II. Now look what we have...something WAY WORSE. Let the Persecuton Begin ! close the hospitals ! close the schools ! restrict the Churches ! how soon can this be engineered in the name of tolerance?
I don't see why you feel any change of the law will impact Catholic Marriage. I derive the sanctity of my marriage from the love of my wife, based in the Holy Spirit, and the vows we shared. I don't derive any sanctity from government action. In fact, as my many Catholic priest friends point out, marriage is the only sacrement not bestowed by clergy; the sacrement is bestowed, one to another, by the husband and wife, and the priest serves as a witness. That separates and protects marriage even more from government changes. I know (I don't hope) that my marriage and the Catholic institution of marriage can survive any change of such an unrelated nature to the secular law. What do we have to fear? We've endured much greater trials, as have other religions, and we still maintain our values and dignity. Most of the comments above focus on Catholic beliefs and the need to adhere to Catholic teachings and avoid moral equivilancy within ourselves and our Church. That's hard enough to do when focused internally, let alone when we lose focus and try to impart our views on others who were not raised as we were and don't have our belief system. Let's speak our views, but consider Catholic marriage even more of a priveledge and holy institution because it cannot be threatened unless we let it be.
To the ignorant persson who made the ignorant claim about Catholic child molesting priests- newsflash- those priets were HOMOSEXUALS who preyed on teenage boys. According to the non religous John Jay Study, 80% of child abuse cases involved homosexual priests molesting boys between the ages of 10 to 17 years old, with many of them being teenage boys between the ages of 13 to 15. It is for this reason that men with same sex attraction are now denied entry into seminaries. It is your perpetual victims- homosexuals- who are responsible for the abuse of children in the Catholic Church. Inform yourself before you speak out of ignorance.
Obama must be President of the entire nation, with people of varied and in some cases, no beliefs. This is not an attack on the Church or on marriage. It is an attempt to bring us all together in the best sense as citizens. It is up to individual conscience to determine one's faith.
One can not dispute that the majority of Americans elected Obama. Maybe the religious right can finally be kicked to the curb (which btw is close to the gutter), at least for a while.
Well, it's clear that this comment thread has been hijacked by an activist homosexual agenda claiming to follow the teachings of Jesus. Those who cry "hatred" and "oppression" simply do not know who the real enemy is. It is not the author or the Catholic Church. Satan is thrilled that he has persuaded us to murder our own children in the womb, and now to regard homosexual relations as good and equal to the holy union of man and woman. We are being deceived into accepting death as freedom and life. And by the way, tolerance is not a virtue. There is no charity in tolerating sin.
Judging by the number of anti-Catholic responses to this article, the homosexual blogosphere is out promoting its agenda after Obama's speech this morning. Nice job, -what other religious sites have been hit today with this propaganda and rhetoric? You can talk all you want about "inclusion" within the church, but I'm afraid there's been a misunderstanding of Christ and what He came here to do. Weak generalities of feel-good "love" (which are nothing more than SELF-loving hedonism) and relativistic "moral equivalence" as a substitute for actual equality are NOT part of Christ's teachings nor subsequently, part of the Christian faith. Trying to manipulate our faith to incorporate them (through guilt, name calling or other means) so they reflect a particular lifestyle is at best dishonest and at worst heresy. What Christ did advocate was obedience, -not obedience to men,women or their government, but to GOD, -to the point of suffering, humiliation and death. I'm afraid there's simply no room there for the feel-good permissiveness definition of love that so often underscores propaganda terms like "hateful" when rightly rejected. Love of self is not the love God calls us to pursue, -something people who encourage this kind of quasi-spiritual doublethink would do well to recognize. Obedience to God as revealed in His word is the main reason that the Catholic and other churches oppose same-sex marriage. Might I ask, what are the noble reasons for supporting it? Legitimacy through "human rights,"- which frankly is being achieved piecemeal through the courts daily, - or is it perhaps about something more general, such as the power of control over expression in America's daily life? Put bluntly, is it an onslaught on the free thinking of individuals who may not agree with same-sex activities? Because I think this is a lot less about civil rights (that again, are being achieved without national legislation) and a lot more about being able to promote an alternative lifestyle within the very fabric our nations churches, schools and state to a hostage audience that will be deemed "hateful" if they don't want to watch.
Legislation intended to extend people's rights does not negate the legitimacy of your spiritual beliefs which MUST BE KEPT SEPARATE from the law. One can believe that their marriage is sacred while someone else can feel the same. The US government is NOT attempting to change ecumenical policy. It's about civil rights. If the government promotes contraception because it's proven scientifically to help maintain the numbers of unwanted pregnancies, then it doesn't effect the church's policy. This is the same thing. A Christian may believe whatever he or she wants but doesn't have the right to deprive someone else of their equality in the state based on their own personal feelings. Is it now the policy of the Catholic Church to disallow other belief systems? Are you telling me that we're returning to the times when thinkers like Galileo were shut down for having ideas different from historically held beliefs? Lastly, the "Defense of Marriage" is clearly an attempt to paint this backlash against civil rights as a good thing. The president said "so called" perhaps out of spite because it's only called that by the people who are trying to hide their homophobia behind a positively charged term. But clearly "Defense of Marriage" is spiteful as well. Unfortunately, the people who want to allow gay marriage could also be said to want to defend marriage. The civil rights movement isn't pro-gay marriage anyway, they're pro-civil rights. The "Defense of Marriage Act" should more aptly have been called the "Denial of Rights to Non-Fundamentalists Act" or the "Maintaining Civic Inequality Based on Sexual Orientation Act." Or maybe it should have been called something equally as hateful as the content of the legislation.
TO ALL HERE ON THIS WESITE MAKING COMMENTARY: If anyone here comes back this way do me a favor and go over to the Courage Apostolate Website if you get a chance. Peace.
There are other religions that do believe in gay marriage; and if you give the government the power to interfere with those religions you also are giving the government the right to legislate what happens in your church.
Why must you be reminded that the USCCB, ae our shepards; not our lambs. Your rhetoric is overtly polemic, and the swipe at the bishops is not in keeping with doctrine, which includes obedience, lest we all become Luther's. Why not just simply say, the president is wrong on this issue as he is on abortion; and which is your right as an American, without the veiled attack on our shepards the USCCB. I think the PhD. has gone to your head. Regards, Fred Celio
i suspect you're deliberately blinding yourself to the difference between civil and religious marriage. in America, no one will ever tell churches who they can and can't marry. that's a separate issue from a secular civil contract between 2 people that has certain ramifications for taxes, inheritance etc, that confusingly is also called "marriage". don't conflate this secular civil contract with religious rituals. let catholics exclude whomever they want from their religious rituals, but that has nothing to do with the fact that it's against our secular constitution to deny civil marriage to some pairs of consenting adults (no man-animal man-child absurdities, you alarmist deceivers) based on the homo- or heterosexuality of the couple. that's the theoretical argument; add the fact that all serious research shows kids of same-sex couples are equally well-adjusted and mentally healthy as kids of heterosexual couples, and there's not many valid reasons left to oppose it, if any. in Iowa, 92% say that the introduction of gay marriage has not affected their lives: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/21/poll-92-of-iowans-believe_n_293539.html
What is wrong with you people?! How many of you call yourselves "Christian" and don't even know the meaning of the word? Marriage IS a covenant between a MAN and a WOMAN. To call a homosexual partnership a "marriage" is to take all meaning from the word. Do you, who call yourselves Christian while supporting people living in sin, know anything about what the church teaches? Don't you know what the Bible says about sexual immorality? How can you even think Jesus would support gay "marriage?" I thank God for this website and the writers who are not afraid to stand up for what's right, and who don't give in the the backwards thinking of modern society.
I love how Catholics use militant words such as "Attack" and "declare war" to describe an effort to ensure equal rights to individuals who disagree with their ideology. Very similar in form to arguments against women's and black's rights in the early and mid 20th century. Also, @A.B. Weston: "I wonder who will speak to the value of unselfishness and sacrifice rather than the emphasis on "me" and "what I want" " ---> Hilarious coming from someone trying to dictate their beliefs on a public who is virtually split on the issue.
It is the love of our neighbors that compels us to speak up and try to stop these things. It would not be loving of us to sit back and watch people damn themselves to hell. And read the article again, I think the author makes all of the pertinant points and arguments as to how this is dangerous to the country, not the church.
I love how the gay "rights" pushers bombard this website for the little bit that interests them, which is ME, MYSELF, and I!!. Do you guys email all your friends and direct them here so they can add their "disgust" and "offense", especially "Fr. Lawler" and "St. Quadragesemus" and all the other names that I don't recognize as the usual commentors on this website. You will probably get your civil "rights" but you will never change God's words that "a man shall not lay with another man." You are deceiving yourselves and endangering your souls. Satan is working overtime here.
Father Paqua's homily today on EWTN references this very subject - and that those who attack the Church's teaching are trying to justify their own behavior - and that the wrath of God will be revealed
Why should only homosexual couples have equal rights with married couples? how about polygamists, animal lovers, man-boy lovers, two sisters or three, mother-son, father-daughter, father-son. Logical progression would say all are equal. What's wrong with that? Aren't we all created equal in ALL our dispositions and orientations? And why should there be any special rights to anybody because they are having sexual relations? Has it ever been written in our laws that marriage is anything other than a civil law? It could not possibly have been based on any logical premise. laws of nature? oh, so stale! What does matrimony really even mean anyway? Whatever we want it to mean. It's just a word. Mr. Hudson, help me out. Sara
welcome to the 21st century. this isn't the dark ages, not the enlightenment. gays, lesbians etc deserve the same rights as anyone else, catholic, muslim, jewish, buddhist, agnostic, atheist etc..... we DO NOT live in a theocracy.
I am proud to be a member of the Catholic Church and to embrace all of its teachings. One of those teachings to to love your neighbor - but does not that mean that I must love my neighbor's actions. Thank you to the US Bishops for speaking out clearly on these issues regarding marriage, family and abortion. Jesus said to pick up our cross and follow him. I guess in America, one of those crosses is to be labeled a fanatic or "intolerant." Luckily, I'm a big girl and I can take the name-calling.
Obama says the Defense of Marriage Act is "so called" because no marriage has been harmed by gays. Extending rights to other does not in any way lessen one's own rights. I have yet to hear of one marriage that has been lessened or damaged because a gay couple got married. Enough of this nonsense. If someone has actually been harmed by gay marriage, please let us know who and how. The Defense of Marriage Act will be "so called" until someone provides proof of real harm that has been done.
Marriage should be like Birth. When you are born your parents get a birth certificate from the state. Then you go to your church and get Baptised (or not). Churches define the Baptism sacrament very differently (infant, adult, total immersion, sprinkling, simple child dedication). These are very different processes. No one would expect the state to dictate how churches should perform baptisms or that the church should dictate who gets a birth certificate from the state. Civil marriage and religious marriage are two different processes. The state (under the US constitution) should treat ALL its citizens equally. The church can decide whatever it wants as its doctrine and there are MANY churches who will happily perform religious ceremonies for gay and lesbian couples.
"You will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognize relationships between two men or two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman". The next step is unlimited perversion. The deeper you get into sin the more exposed to Devil`s evil.
Dear Bible reader: Please take the time to find (google) a very good sermon by Fr. Daemon (not sure on spelling) entitled The Bible or the Church. You may find it most interesting and edifying. Your thinking amounts to "sola scriptura" which is most protestant. What POTUS does and says is not a surprise to anyone - he said as much before he was elected and as we all know, Catholics elected him. As Fr. Corapi states most eloquently: we are at war and if you don;t believe it, look around you. Satan is everywhere.
This article has been targeted by the Gay Rights Movement. The Pro Gay Ajenda comments are an attempt to trick the steadfast Catholic into into thinking that they are the minority. Stand fast in Him. We are the Majority! Don't let them fool you!
Darren Irwin isn't even gay. He's a militant who likes to be the center of attention, and cause trouble. "We're moving next door to you!" Good grief. As for him saying that we should study the Bible - it's quite obvious that he is one to pick and choose which scriptures to read, then twist those scriptures to his desire. Ask the residents of Soddom and Gamorrah what God the Father thinks of homosexuality. They had much the same attitude as Darren. "We're here, we're queer, and we will take what is rightfully ours!" Even when that meant assaulting the messangers of God, the queers wanted what they wanted. Darren knows nothing of the Bible, he just wants to stir up trouble.
Ok, clearly this article was emailed out to people who support gay "marriage", encouraging them to comment. Don't come to a Catholic website and be offended when it teaches Catholic values.
Mr. Hudson, I have to respectfully but strongly disagree with your incendiary and somewhat baffling claim. The President is hardly "declaring war" on marriage. In fact, he has proven unwilling to push even the most basic tenets of same-sex equality, such as eliminating the military's don't ask-don't tell policy. Given Obama's strong Christian commitment to peace-seeking (instead of war-mongering) and opposition to immoral wars like Iraq and sinful activities such as torture -- all of which align quite closely with Vatican teachings -- not to mention a personal opposition to abortion that goes against the Democratic mainstream, I would hope that Catholics would see in this president an ally and not an enemy. I wouldn't worry, though. The ban on same-sex unions will soon be going the way of Jim Crow, and the institution of marriage (both secular and religious) will remain not just safe but stronger in the end. No war has been declared, except perhaps by those who believe that some of our citizens deserve fewer rights than others. I sincerely hope that you would not count yourself among their number.
I am very encouraged by the wise comments to this article. I see a lot of good, old fashioned 'turn the other cheek' and 'do unto others' here. How refreshing.
I still don't understand why the church cares if the state marries same sex couples.
I am discouraged that the Catholics making the comments above are against Bible teachings. The Church should ALWAYS hold the teachings of the BIBLE ABOVE ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS. Follow HIM, not your "feelings" of self-righteousness. Why is it so difficult to find someone that is opposed to this immorality? Do we just lie down and say "well... it doesn’t effect me, so why should I care?" We are the chosen. We should stand up for what is rightfully His. We should not stand idly by while Politicians re-write what has been written for millennia. No government should have that power. Does anyone remember Babylon, Sodom, and Rome?
I'm sick of all the noise for "gay rights". Gays already have the same rights everyone else does. A homosexual male can marry any female he chooses. The fact that he doesn't choose to do so means one thing only: he is not exercising his rights. That is not a failing of the constitution, or the law. Marriage is more than just a legal arrangement for tax purposes. The gays aren't going to improve American life, or make America stronger with this nonsense. If anything, they will weaken America. Catering to narcissism always precedes a nation's downfall. Study history. No gay society has withstood the test of time.
"Obama has...declared war on marriage." Really? I am not a Catholic, but I am saddened to think that I am now an enemy of the Church, simply because I hold sacred the Christian values of love and tolerance. The author's defensive accusation of "contempt" belies a fundamental misunderstanding, that it's the president's duty to be be preeminently guided by one religious tradition or another, instead of by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. If the Catholic Church insists on turning this complex human rights issue into a simple "war" between two sides, it thus turns a majority Americans, who believe in freedom and equality, into its enemies. Don't you think that's sad, too?
Actually, Judaism understands marriage as a civil union between one man and one or more women—not counting the concubines and such. God is present only as a witness to the oaths. The weddings in the Jewish scripture are business affairs first and foremost. Likewise, Islam (like the Church of Later Day Saints) recognizes polygamy, though US civil law doesn't. Ditto Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism and many of the indigenous tribal religions. Since the so-called Defense of Marriage Act fails to recognize those religions' definitions of marriage, the "so-called" is well-earned: it should have been called the Defense of Mainstream Christian Marriage Act. And what about atheists? They don't believe a god exists, as is their right. It seems to me that it's a lot more defensible that they insist that any mention of a deity be removed from any state-sanctioned wedding service than that a very narrow, sectarian definition of marriage be foist upon the rest of us. You'll notice that I haven't even gotten anywhere near the homophobic heart of this issue—the approach taken by Congress is so ludicrously sectarian that that conversation isn't really necessary. The distinction that needs to be made in the US—as it is made in many other parts of the world—is between marriage as a legal bond and as a religious sacrament. A religious body can and should decide what sort of weddings it will or won't perform, but shouldn't be able to define what sorts of marriages a state should or shouldn't recognize on the sole basis of "God's will." After all, as soon as you go down that road, it begs the question: WHICH god's will? And the minute you answer that question, you've stepped onto religio-centric, unconstitutional ground.
I can't add to the previous comments, except that I'm proud to be a Catholic when other Catholics take issue with partisan political rhetoric such as that which fills this article.
I'm glad to see not all Catholics are gobbling this stuff up. Regardless of your principles, regardless even of an entire global faith's principles -- I thought we had surpassed a place and time where it seemed all but common sense for a religious organization to make, influence, or even lobby for Law. "When religion has a hand in governance, it becomes theocracy."
Ever since we have walked away from Cardinal Bernadin's "seemless garment" approach to ethics we have sounded like reactors not actors in the moral life of our nation. The faithful are not living these same harsh feelings. In the end, each of us will not be asked if we did what we were told but instead will be asked about our living service to those who need it most.
Reading this article is so biased. I am Christian and nowhere nowhere does President Obama state this is causing harm to the Catholic Church or Marriage?? Where do you get this stuff? He speaking to people who are being denied benefits because of who they love? My God where is your compassion and love for your fellow brother? Who is judging whom?
People I am shocked at you ignorance. As a Christian I do not believe in same sex relationships. As I do not believe in stealing, murder, adultery and a whole host of other sins. However the latter seems to exist heavily in our society regardless. How can you condemn one man for supporting a groups rights. He is not saying he believes in what they do he is saying he believes in their rights as a human. As christians it is our job to CONVERT those who walk the wrong path not judge. Judgement belongs to GOD and GOD only. Do not presume too much of yourself to assume the resposibility of GOD. Sinners have rights as humans, their judgement resides in GODs hand not yours.
An absolutely disgusting article. In what way does treating people as equals threaten us Catholics in any way? That doesn't seem very Christian to me. The author of this article should be ashamed of himself.
Yet another reason the Catholic Church, which I grew up in, is irrelevant today in my life. I find this mindset offensive and archaic. And the article is incorrect - there are people of faith who embrace the LBGT community.
1. "Obama" is not declaring war on marriage or the Catholic Church, what he is saying is the will of the majority of Americans. 2. Accusing Obama of declaring war on the Catholic Church, is both offensive and sensationalist. 3. It is sad, but not surprising, that despite all of our advances in civil rights, that we still have to deal with the same sort of nonsense every time a new group of people wants to be treated like human beings.
It's this kind of self-righteous bigotry that makes it more and more difficult for people to take Catholicism seriously. When half of all marriages end in divorce, who are we to say a same-sex marriage is any less sacred?
What happened to the separation of Church and State?
There is something about this position that escapes me... It is my understanding that the Church has never acknowledged marriages outside of it's own walls, so why the big fuss over same-sex marriages performed in a public context? Perhaps my own understandings are misguided, but there seems to be a contradiction here: How can the Church stand against same-sex marriage when, by its own definition of marriage, it is not a marriage at all?
President Obama is making this a human rights issue, exactly what it should be. Why would we as a nation advocate making any of our citizens second class? Last I can recall from taking a Civics and Government class, the separation of state and religion still applied in this great country of ours, so while the Catholic Church can hold an opinion, it is only that, an opinion.
Jesus had two dads and he turned out okay
I wonder who will stand up for the family, will speak out for strengthening of the home and the environment where children are nurtured and prepared to become responsible adults. I wonder who will speak to the value of unselfishness and sacrifice rather than the emphasis on "me" and "what I want", looking at what is good for the nation and the world. It doesn't appear that this president ever looks at the long term ramifications of his political agenda!
Speak for yourself. Contempt is rightly due to those who think that there is consensus on "the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim understanding of marriage." In fact, people of faith differ on this. Remarkable to be so arrogant as to think you speak for all believers, and yet to be so insecure as to think that granting political and economic rights to others harms you in some way.
I am a catholic, and would like to express my disgust with this article, even though I am not an Obama supporter. Enough said.
Is it not the right of a country to govern itself? The state permitting gay marriage does not force the Church to do the same. Indeed, the Church can still keep its tenants and direct its followers in the path. The United States, despite references to a Creator in its Constitution, was founded first as a secular entity, not as a religious one. Expecting it to follow the wishes of the Church is foolhardy. I suggest those who imagine some war against the Church keep their own house and allow the United States to do the same. I'm reminded of Mark 12:17 "And Jesus answering said to them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." Or, more precisely, Hebrews 11:13-16 "All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth. People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them."
Thank you for reminding me of why I and so many others have left Catholicism. By requiring non-Catholics to conform to your own particular definition of marriage, you are rapidly becoming a fundamentalist organization that will continue to shrink it's ranks and lose touch with the coming generations, as well as basic ideas of social justice. I feel compelled to protect my children from your brand of religion until they are old enough to make decisions for themselves.
Why on earth are you worried about the marriage customs of non Catholics? And what part of the Separation of Church and State do you not get? President Obama is not attacking the Catholic Church. However, it appears that the Catholic Church is seeing fit to attack non Cathlics.
What is "dangerous" about same sex marriage exactly? There are more hypocrites in the church then there are in politics. It's Religion that is in need of reform.
I don't understand how making countless couples eligible to marry doesn't strengthen the institution of marriage. That said, I don't think the "institution" requires defense, as it is an abstraction, unlikely to experience actual harm, whereas couples who are prevented from marrying suffer a very real form of discrimination.
This plight of homosexual couples is no different than when interracial marriage used to be outlawed. Heterosexual couples are not superior to homosexual couples.
I am surprised at how hateful your religion seems to make you. You have every right to believe in whatever you want! But don't push your beliefs on other people! Mind your own business. Let gays and lesbians be happy.
It is time the church stop preventing people from equal rights, just because their beliefs are different. God loves all people, not just Catholics.
Seperation of Church and State. It doesn't matter what the Christian, Jewish or Muslim definition of marriage is when it comes to US law. It doesn't matter what the Mormon definition of marriage is either. Up until now the "legal" form of marriage and the "religious" form of marriage were intertwined. That bond needs to be broken. They shoudl be considered 2 different thing. Obama is talking only about the "legal" definition. Christians can continue to define marriage any way they want. Remember, there are a LOT of atheists in this country and they want to get married too. Leave them alone. And there are a lot of Christian gays that want to get married (legally) and that is fine by me.
As a woman engaged to be married to a man, I support your right to practice your religion and perform church wedding ceremonies according to your conscience. However, the government is not a Christian/Muslim/Jewish organization. It is a secular organization, designed for the purpose of protecting the rights of all citizens, regardless of their religious affiliation. So what if two people of the same gender walk into a courthouse and sign a marriage license? What is that to you? I won't interfere in your religion. Don't you interfere in the rights of my fellow Americans.
Catholics get a life! Who cares who marries who! Worry about yourself and not others.
As a Catholic, I take offense to the notion that President Obama is waging any war on marriage. He is a living example of what God intended with the sacred union of family. God created ALL human beings, including our Gay and Lesbian Brothers and Sisters. Jesus, the son of God, came with the most powerful message to love ALL people as God loves us. AND, to reserve judgement of others for that is God's job alone. God will be more likely to bless the oppressed than the oppressors on judgment day. Hold your fire and your tongue and let people love one another as God commanded.
I have been Catholic all my life, and this has been one thing that has always irritated me. Why cant the church share the damn word.The is something as bigoted and hateful as the word nigger. Who really cares if a gay or lesbian couple calls thier civil union a marraige or not. They stand before god. I think more catholic families really need to mind whats going on in their homes then there would be less divorces. I find this a very bigoted article and the beginings of hatred. By the way Im a 37 year old chatholic, I have been to the vatican a number of times and I love the church. I think maybe people sould pay more attention to their own devotion.
Overreact much? I thought that Jesus Christ preached love, acceptance and forgiveness. Equality for all people sounds pretty Christian to me. And it's certainly not a declaration of war. But I guess that doesn't make for a very interesting web post.
The 21st century is great. I wish the Catholic Church would join us.
treating homosexuals as equals is not a "war on marriage", it's end the inequality that many major religions propagate. I look forward to seeing this comment deleted as "spam" or as a "troll".
I think it is about time free thinking Americans take back their secular Republic from religious fanatics. Marriage in America is a secular, legal contract. Religion has nothing to do with it. Perhaps, it would be better for Americans to go after child molesting Catholic priests and the Catholic corporations that defend them?? I think so.
It's time! Love will win and I will be able to marry my partner of 7 years. We are coming and we will take what is rightfully ours. Get used to it! Learn the teachings of Jesus and you will see that oppression in any form is a sin against God and Man! We're moving next door to you!
Catholics and religious people in general are finally going to have to accept that there are many belief systems operating in this country. The laws are not designed to support your minority opinion. We accept that you won't marry two people of the same sex in your church. Now it's time for you to accept the fact that other people think differently. Let us all live together in peace.