Showing posts with label Respect for Marriage Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Respect for Marriage Act. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 13, 2022

Defending true marriage - Archbishop Cordileone

 

CONGRESS DISHONORS MARRIAGE




The union of husband and wife is unique: Together they make a baby, and their marriage is the best way to ensure that that baby grows up with both mother and father. Marriage is a good thing. Society needs this institution.

Until a few years ago, virtually every culture in existence recognized the unique stake society has in affirming these unions. Even cultures that condoned sexual relations outside the bond of marriage—including between people of the same sex—never confused these relations with marriage. And today, after five decades of consistent social science data showing the devastating social ills resulting from fatherlessness, you would think Congress would want to do something to put the family back together. Instead, last week, it took a decisive step in the opposite direction. 

They call it the “Respect for Marriage Act.” It passed both Houses of Congress and now goes to President Biden to be signed into law. It requires the federal government to recognize same-sex marriages as legitimate. Its cheerleaders celebrate it as an advancement in equality, liberty, and respect. But equality and liberty for whom? Respect for what?

Certainly not for children. The best thing we can do for children is give them a married mother and father in a stable, life-long, low-conflict relationship. Parents in other-than-optimal situations who make great sacrifices to do their best for their children deserve our esteem and support. But the lack of a father or a mother is always a loss. Paradoxically, many of those who advance and applaud this legislation claim to be fighting to help the poor, while undermining the one thing that most protects children from ending up in poverty: marriage and family unity. Do you want to help the poor? Then put the family back together, based on the life-long marital commitment of husband and wife. Anything else is sheer hypocrisy.

Nor does the curiously misnamed “Respect for Marriage Act” protect or treat equally the millions of Americans who believe the basic social good of marriage should be protected and promoted. It is bad enough that this legislation does not provide adequate protections for those of us in the new minority, but most offensive of all is that the purported protections are presented as a license to “discriminate,” saying, in effect, “We will give religious people a right to discriminate in this case, but no one else may.”

This is an inaccurate and appalling way to describe the right to religious freedom and the public exercise of one’s faith. Unjust discrimination is wrong all the time, by everyone. And, in point of fact, the vendors who have had to go to court to defend their right to live according to their conscience never ask their customers what their sexual orientation is before giving them service. What is actually happening here is that the legislation fails to protect a person's right not to be forced to act according to the beliefs of another, beliefs with which he or she does not agree. We have moved from “tolerance” to imposing the dogmas of secular orthodoxy on the entire populace, stripping away the rights of those who believe differently to act according to those beliefs.

Another deceptive technique in the act: It claims that the view that marriage is uniquely between a man and a woman is somehow a religious belief. However, acknowledging the basic social good of marriage is not a question of faith, but of reason. Religious faith gives a deeper, spiritual understanding to this basic social good, but it certainly is not necessary to come to acknowledge it. Reason alone suffices for that.

How, then, should those in the new minority respond to these discouraging developments? By loving their spouses and their children enough to discipline their sexual desires (or their future spouse, if not yet married). By eschewing abortion, practicing chastity, staying married if already married, resolving family conflicts peaceably, and treasuring children as a gift from God—all to show that there is a better alternative to the now dominant narrative.

Congress just made this difficult challenge harder. But that doesn’t matter. By our example, we can show the world that there is a better way.

Young people: Do you want to make a difference? Then get married and stay married, have children, and sacrifice your all—your comfort and convenience, your desires and self-indulgences, your time and your treasure—for the healthy upbringing of your kids. True, you won’t fit in with the rest of society, so be forewarned: As someone once said, the world is hostile to those who don’t fit in. But you will make a difference, and a difference for the good. That’s far better than simply fitting in, only to be forgotten to history. 

Thursday, December 8, 2022

Editorial: Catholics must be opposed to the wrongly worded Respect for Marriage Act

 

Editorial: Now is not the time to obfuscate on marriage

wedding rings
Adobe Stock

On Aug. 29, 2017, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention drafted a text to reaffirm, in the wake of the Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex “marriage” nationwide, a biblical understanding of Christian marriage. The preamble to the document the commission produced, known as the Nashville Statement, reads: “By and large the spirit of our age no longer discerns or delights in the beauty of God’s design for human life. Many deny that God created human beings for his glory, and that his good purposes for us include our personal and physical design as male and female.”

Now, five years later, the American public, across party and religious lines, overwhelmingly supports the legal redefinition of marriage. Public figures have backed en masse the deceptively named Respect for Marriage Act. On Thursday, Dec. 8, after having previously passed the U.S. Senate, the House of Representatives passed the bill with a 258-169 vote. President Joe Biden has promised to sign the measure into law without delay.

Facing these staggering odds, people of faith may find themselves without the social capital, political resources and clarity of thought to peacefully dissent. As the public considers the Respect for Marriage Act, the defenders of secular orthodoxy do not welcome or respect the believer’s defiance, much less civilly engage with those who hold fast to the Christian understanding. Because of this, many Christians find themselves privately holding to the biblical view of marriage, perhaps teaching it to their children, but disengaging from the current debate.

The response of Catholics everywhere to the Respect for Marriage Act can and must be peaceable but determined opposition. Now is not the time to acquiesce, concur or assent. Out of respect for the true understanding of marriage — namely, that God calls one man and one woman to be united in an exclusive and lasting partnership ordered to the generation of offspring and the goods of family life — we must stand and defend Catholic teaching.

Marriage is not merely one facet of what political commentators have dubbed “the culture war.” Marriage is the most fundamental institution of society, without which families and communities will fragment and decay. To deter that tragic end, believers can prepare for conversations about the Catholic understanding of marriage by focusing on three major currents of the debate.

First, Catholics must be concerned about the nature of words. No matter what the public at large, or their elected representatives, think of same-sex unions, such a union is not, nor can it ever be, marriage. In the Christian view, the world — including our bodies and our embodied sex — is received from God who authored it in a plan of love. The attempt to redefine words, particularly an institution like marriage, must be identified and resisted. Marriage will always mean the complementary affiliation of a man and a woman for the purpose of procreation and the raising of children in a stable, committed union.

Second, the culture at large has effectively decided that what two consenting adults have determined contributes to their personal pursuit of happiness has no bearing on the rest of society. This is not true. Marriage matters to the public; it is not a private concern. Legal protections were awarded to marriage because marriage fostered unity in society and provided for the special protection of society’s most vulnerable members: children. By welcoming and educating children, parents build a society’s future. But filiation is directly tied to a couple comprising one man and one woman. A man and a woman together are the biological origins of life, which no technological development can replace. The inescapable complementarity of parenthood extends to the compassion with which mothers and fathers nurture and the virtues they model for their children.

Finally, and most urgently, this legislation threatens the free exercise of religion. To defend the true understanding of marriage does not discriminate against same-sex attracted persons, nor does it even, necessarily, oppose civil protections for same-sex partnerships. But the Respect for Marriage Act’s provisions fail to provide adequate protections for religious believers and imperil Catholics who would live according to the dictates of their conscience and the teachings of our faith.

The bill would affect faith-based adoption agencies, housing programs and agencies serving immigrants. Moreover, religious organizations could be compelled to provide benefits to same-sex spouses or to hire and retain staff who reject the organization’s view of marriage. Ultimately, in a not-so-distant future, religious organizations could lose their tax-exempt status and even be barred from the use of public property, because of the simple principle that law builds on law.

Resistance to the Respect for Marriage Act is about opposing the redefinition of a term and upholding the free exercise of religion, while safeguarding the unique institution that fosters life and forms the basic building block of all societies. As our culture decays because the cult on which it is based is being steadily banished to the edges of our shared worldview, standing up for the truth will take the form of nonconformity. We must ready ourselves for current and future dissent.

Our Sunday Visitor Editorial Board: Father Patrick Briscoe, Gretchen R. Crowe, Scott P. Richert, Scott Warden, York Young

Joe Biden continues to thumb his nose at the Catholic Church

 

Same-sex marriage bill pits Biden against Catholic bishops — again

BY ALEX GANGITANO


President Biden is butting heads with Catholic bishops again, this time over same-sex marriage protections expected to reach his desk this week.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) opposes the Respect for Marriage Act, arguing it doesn’t include enough leeway for religious organizations.

“I disagree,” Biden, only the second Catholic president in U.S. history, told reporters on Tuesday about the bishops’ objections.

The fight between Biden and the bishops is all too familiar after the they spent much of his first year in the White House trying to deny him communion over his stance on abortion rights.

Conservative Catholic bishops had called for the church not to offer communion to Biden or other pro-abortion rights politicians, but, in November of last year, the USCCB signaled an end to the debate by issuing a document on communion without mentioning the president or other politicians.

Before the document was finalized, Biden received support from Pope Francis, who the president said told him he should keep receiving communion.

Throughout his time as president, Biden has consistently called for protections for abortion access, and he has often been found attending Catholic mass either in Wilmington, Del., or in Washington.

Biden also regularly calls for defending the rights of LGBTQ Americans.

He has urged Congress to send him the Senate-passed bill that would repeal of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which recognized marriage as “only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.”

The White House describes the Respect for Marriage Act as “personal” to the president, presenting another balancing act for Biden between his faith and his support for a social issue that is in opposition to the church’s teaching.

The House is posed to pass the bill this week after the Senate cleared the measure last week in a 61-38 vote. Twelve Republicans joined on to the bill once it included an amendment outlining some protections for religious beliefs.

That amendment was also crucial for gaining support from religious institutions because it shields them from having to provide services supporting same-sex marriage. Faiths and groups including the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Seventh-day Adventist Church, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America and the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities all support the religious freedom protections in the bill.

But the changes haven’t been enough for the Catholic bishops.

“This bill fails to include clear, comprehensive, and affirmative conscience protections for religious organizations and individuals who uphold the sanctity of traditional marriage that are needed,” said Bishop Robert E. Barron, chairman of the USCCB’s committee on laity, marriage, family life and youth.

Barron added that “decades of social and legal developments” have led to society losing sight of the “purpose of marriage.”

Same-sex marriage has been legal nationwide since the Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, while the Catholic Church is one of several that only recognizes marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

The debate over same-sex marriage was resurrected this summer when the Supreme Court ended the decades-long right to abortion access by overturning Roe v. Wade. In Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion for that ruling, he called on the court to also reconsider the precedent for Obergefell v. Hodges.

Since then, Biden and other Democrats have sought to move quickly to protect marriage equality, and the White House celebrated the Senate passing the bill as a historic step.

“This is a huge step forward,” Karine Jean-Pierre, the first openly LGBTQ person to serve as White House press secretary, said last week. “And it is historic that we saw this movement from Congress in a bipartisan way to protect same-sex marriage.”

House will follow the Senate in codifying same-sex "marriage"

 

House expected to pass same-sex marriage bill Thursday


The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to pass the Respect for Marriage Act (RFMA) on Thursday, sending it to President Joe Biden’s desk for his signature.

The bill, which would repeal the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and recognize same-sex marriages on a federal level, has drawn criticism from Catholic leaders for not providing strong enough protections for those who believe marriage is between one man and one woman — a belief in line with Church teaching.

C-SPAN Capitol Hill Producer Craig Caplan tweeted Wednesday that the House plans to vote on the final version of the RFMA Thursday morning, followed by a bill enrollment ceremony around 11:30 a.m. in the U.S. Capitol.


The final vote comes after the U.S. Senate, with the support of 12 Republicans, voted to pass the RFMA on Nov. 29. If it passes now, Biden, a Catholic, has pledged to sign it into law

While it would not require any state to allow same-sex couples to marry, the RFMA would require states to recognize any and all marriages — regardless of “sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin” — performed in other states. 

The U.S. bishops stated in a November letter to Congress that the bill’s amendments do not sufficiently protect those with religious objections.

“The amended act will put the ministries of the Catholic Church, people of faith, and other Americans who uphold a traditional meaning of marriage at greater risk of government discrimination,” the letter stated.

“Our opposition to RMA by no means condones any hostility toward anyone who experiences same-sex attraction,” the bishops emphasized. “Catholic teaching on marriage is inseparable from Catholic teaching on the inherent dignity and worth of every human being. To attack one is to attack the other. Congress must have the courage to defend both.”

A United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ explanation appended to the letter read: “Given all this — that the bill establishes an affirmative, enforceable, comprehensive right to federal and interstate recognition of same-sex marriages but sets out religious liberty protections that are far from comprehensive, and are neither affirmative nor enforceable outside of the limited protections in Section 6(b) — it is fair to say that the amendment treats religious liberty as a second-class right.”

Democrats blocked an amendment Monday offered by Republican Rep. Chip Roy of Texas that would have included explicit protections for Americans who believe marriage is between one man and one woman. The same amendment, which has the support of the bishops, was previously introduced in the Senate by Sen. Mike Lee of Utah.

After the vote was initially delayed, Reuters reported that the legislation was expected to pass in the House later this week with bipartisan support.

The RFMA represents one of the first legislative responses to the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade in June. While the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization said that “this decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right,” Democrats have pointed to Justice Clarence Thomas’ concurring opinion suggesting the court should reconsider all “substantive due process” cases, including the 2015 Obergefell decision on same-sex marriage.


DOMA, which the present bill would repeal, is a 1996 law signed by President Bill Clinton that defined marriage federally as the union of a man and a woman, reserved federal benefits to heterosexual couples, and permitted states not to recognize same-sex marriages contracted in other states. DOMA was already effectively nullified by the 2013 and 2015 Supreme Court decisions United States v. Windsor and Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage in all 50 states. 

Friday, December 2, 2022

Bishops' response to Senate's passage of the misnamed Respect for Marriage Act

 

‘Gravely disappointed’: U.S. bishops respond to passage of the same-sex marriage act




Today the U.S. bishops responded to the U.S. Senate’s passage of the Respect for Marriage Act, saying society “has lost sight of the purpose of marriage.”

Bishop Robert Barron, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life, and Youth, strongly condemned the bill’s passage.

“We are gravely disappointed that the misnamed Respect for Marriage Act passed the Senate and continue to call for its rejection,” Barron wrote.

The Respect for Marriage Act passed the Senate Tuesday, redefining marriage to include unions between homosexual couples and mandating that all states must recognize homosexual marriages. The bill passed with bipartisan support, with 12 Republicans voting in favor. As passed by the Senate, the bill enshrines into law and expands the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized homosexual marriage across the nation.


Barron wrote that “decades of social and legal developments have torn sexuality, childbearing, and marriage from each other in the public consciousness.” In his statement, Barron called to mind Pope Francis’ 2016 address in which he said, “We can hardly stop advocating marriage simply to avoid countering contemporary sensibilities … We would be depriving the world of values that we can and must offer.”

Barron stated that Christians must share the truth of marriage as “a lifelong and exclusive union, a complete and mutual gift of the husband and wife to each other for their good and for the procreation and education of children, [and] is essential to the common good.”

In addition to contributing to the “diminishment of the sacredness and integrity of marriage in our society,” the act’s passage threatens religious freedom in the U.S., the statement said.

“This bill fails to include clear, comprehensive, and affirmative conscience protections for religious organizations and individuals who uphold the sanctity of traditional marriage,” Barron wrote.

Having passed the Senate, the Respect for Marriage Act will return to the U.S. House of Representatives for a vote on the amendments added by the Senate.

The U.S. bishops stated in a November letter to Congress that the bill’s amendments do not sufficiently protect those with religious objections.

“The amended Act will put the ministries of the Catholic Church, people of faith, and other Americans who uphold a traditional meaning of marriage at greater risk of government discrimination,” the letter stated.

The November letter, penned jointly by Barron and Cardinal Timothy Dolan of the Archdiocese of New York, posited that “the bill will be used to argue that the government has a compelling interest in forcing religious organizations and individuals to treat same-sex civil marriages as valid.”

While stating that “we affirm our respect for the dignity of all engaged in this debate,” Barron reaffirmed the U.S. bishops’ continued opposition to the Respect for Marriage Act.