Gay Marriage - DOMA, 14th Amendment & Supreme Court | HISTORY

Contents:

• GAY
• GAY MARRIAGE

GAY

Angel Rodríguez LuñoPontifil Universy of the Holy Cross AN ETHICAL-POLITICAL PROFILEThe moral and pastoral qutns raised by homosexualy have been treated var documents of the Magisterium of the Church the past 20 years. Wh the publitn of the recent Consiratns Regardg Proposals to Give Legal Regnn to Unns between Homosexual Persons, the Congregatn for the Doctre of the Fah do not tend to backtrack on the issu, but to reerate the ethil-polil problem that homosexual unns pose to legislators and policians var parts of the is a qutn of the requt for legal regnn for habg homosexual partners of all or some of the civil effects which the law regniz for spo, not excludg the right to adopt children. The query do not directly ncern the reasonablens of homosexual practic or unns themselv, but the ethil-polil reasonablens of regulatns, laws or other measur of civil law ncerng them, although, of urse, the two problems are nnected.

"The nial of the social and legal stat of marriage to forms of habatn that are not and nnot be maral is not opposed to jtice; on the ntrary, jtice requir " (Consiratns Regardg Proposals to Give Legal Regnn to Unns between HomosexualPersons, n. Given that homosexual unns are not sued to playg the social role which the nature of thgs is played by the maral unn between a man and a woman, one might wonr whether the State still has the leeway legimately to create one or more forms of legal regnn of homosexual unns. Ultimately, many forms of the State juridil orr are jt acrdance wh nventn, and is not unthkable that such forms uld suffer change whout losg their substantial role of the State on the issue of homosexual unnsThe State generally has the legimate faculty to create new forms of legislatn or to modify those already existence.

GAY MARRIAGE

But as long as matter prerv s well known imperabily, for obv reasons the State nnot let each driver choose, at any moment or whenever he lik, to drive on the right or the the Consiratns mented on here a wealth of ethil, blogil, anthropologil, social and juridil reasons are given, which make clear that grantg specific legal regnn to homosexual unns, the State would be exceedg the bounds of s legimate activy.

The Consiratns rightly note that an evable nsequence of the legal regnn of homosexual unns "would be the refn of marriage, which would bee, s legal stat, an stutn void of sential reference to factors lked to heterosexualy; for example, procreatn and raisg children. Marriage would no longer have an objectively stctural role for social life and the mon good, but would be an exprsn of personal sire or private tonomy, th elimatg the obv, disputable difference wh regard to social life that exists between marriage and homosexual unns. 7) nnot be said, moreover, that the and other forms of damage are jtifiable bee they are necsary orr to avoid suatns which habg homosexuals might be prived of rights that they, as persons and cizens, posss mon.

Scholars and the general public beme creasgly terted the issue durg the late 20th century, a perd when attus toward homosexualy and laws regulatg homosexual behavur were liberalized, particularly wtern Europe and the Uned issue of same-sex marriage equently sparked emotnal and polil clash between supporters and opponents.

Relig and secular expectatns of marriage and sexualy Over time the historil and tradnal cultur origally rerd by the lik of Bachofen and Man slowly succumbed to the homogenizatn imposed by lonialism. In other s, the cultural homogeney supported by the domant relign did not rult the applitn of doctre to the civic realm but may nohels have fostered a smoother seri of discsns among the cizenry: Belgium and Spa had legalized same-sex marriage, for stance, spe official opposn om their predomant relig stutn, the Roman Catholic Church.

Most of the world religns have at some pots their histori opposed same-sex marriage for one or more of the followg stated reasons: homosexual acts vlate natural law or dive tentns and are therefore immoral; passag sacred texts nmn homosexual acts; and relig tradn regniz only the marriage of one man and one woman as valid. ROME — The Vatin says Pope Francis’ ments on gay civil unns were taken out of ntext a documentary that spliced together parts of an old terview, but still nfirmed Francis’ belief that gay upl should enjoy legal Vatin secretariat of state issued guidance to ambassadors to expla the uproar that Francis’ ments created followg the Oct.

Instead, he favored extendg legal protectns to gay upl unr what is unrstood Argenta as a civil unn Francis was known to have taken that posn privately, he had never articulated his support while as pope. “More than a year ago, durg an terview, Pope Francis answered two different qutns at two different tim that, the aforementned documentary, were eded and published as a sgle answer whout proper ntextualizatn, which has led to nfn, ” said the guidance posted by the film, Afeevsky reunts the story of Andrea Rubera, a married gay Catholic who wrote Francis askg for his advice about brgg to the church his three young children wh his was an anguished qutn, given that the Catholic Church teach that gay people mt be treated wh digny and rpect but that homosexual acts are “trsilly disorred.