On Slavery in the World
One
of the more difficult topics I struggle with in conversation with more liberal
folks I deal with in my secular role is the subject of same-sex marriage. There have been a number of really good books
put out to deal with this subject form the Catholic Church’s perspective but we
are dealing with a very sophisticated and well entrenched lobby that includes a
number of national organizations that have some deep pockets. Every time members of the Church raises a
public hand and says, “Hey, wait a minute, that’s not right” or “The Church is
not against the person – it is against immoral actions.” Up pops one of the vocal minority with the well-polished
rhetoric supplied by GLAAD or one of the other so-called Gay Rights groups.
Around
the academically dominated environment in which I principally minister, more
often than not I get called a “hater” or similar derogatory name implying that
I am closed minded and backward in my world view. I take serious issue with this since I am not
the one voicing hate-speech and intolerance.
It seems ironic that society in general listens to these rants. Perhaps it is because the media supports this
jaundiced view but the fact remains, as Cardinal Dolan recently stated; “We
lost the advertising war for the traditional view of marriage."
I’d
like to propose a sound bite of my own to those who claim that traditional
marriage is nothing more than recognition that two “people” love one another;
that any group so attracted by mutual affection is in a sense a family. A major reason I do not believe we should
accept such bonds as equivalent to the heterosexual is, bluntly, I do not
believe slavery is moral.
You may
ask how I reached that statement from the debate on marriage. I was reading a recent refutation of a New
York Times article “The
Latest Sham Science on Gay Parenting” in Crisis Magazine. It attacked an
article written by Nicholas Kristof in support of same-sex marriage citing an
Australian study he said “An Australian study found gay parenting had better
outcomes on average, apparently because gay couples don’t have kids by
accident.” I counted to 10 and said a “Hail Mary.”
The
article was well written and straight forward.
As usual, in the comments section there was a prominent voice of gay
activism using the typical rhetoric referred to above. This individual proposed that gay couples
were better parents because they had to actively work to adopt them (as if
children that are conceived in the normal way is somehow a side-effect of an
action rather than the intent). In this
case, fortunately there was a well-schooled apologist also in the thread
pointing to the fact that most gay couples who really want to have children go
to fertility clinics or surrogates to achieve genetic continuity (that is they
want their own genes involved in the progeny).
Back to
my statement: Slavery is not morally acceptable. Let’s define slavery – “Condition in which
one human being is owned by another.” (from Webster’s On-line Dictionary) What can you call it when a person or couple
go into a business and pay money to produce a child, a child who has no say in
the matter of who pays for them? It is
akin to slavery and in 1965 the Second Vatican Council described slavery,
without qualification, as an infamy that dishonored the Creator and poisoned
human society/
The
next time someone comes after you on the notion of same-sex marriage, just tell
them that you oppose it because you don’t approve of slavery.
Pax
No comments:
Post a Comment