The attempt to roll back marriage equality in Washington State is raising some eyebrows because of the full-tilt way the Catholic Church has involved itself:
A statement in the letter caught my eye:
That phraseology of "treating different things differently" has been uttered several times by former National Organization for Marriage head Maggie Gallagher.
Just more ammunition for those of us who think that NOM is a sham group created and backed by the Catholic Church.
But there will be more on that later . . .
The two bishops of the Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle, in a letter to the faithful, say they will deploy parishes to collect signatures for Referendum 74, a measure for the November ballot designed to roll back same-sex marriage in Washington.
While asking that signatures not be collected on Easter Sunday, the bishops described the issue as “critically important” and said information on the signature drive is being sent to pastors throughout the Western Washington diocese.
The letter is signed by Archbishop J. Peter Sartain and Auxiliary Bishop Eusebio Elizondo. Sartain testified against marriage equality at a Washington State Senate hearing earlier this year.
In their letter, the bishops specifically deny that refusing marriage to same-sex couples equates to discrimination — an argument made by Gov. Christine Gregoire, a Catholic, in arguing for marriage equality.
. . . State Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, a Catholic and long-partnered gay man who sponsored the same-sex marriage bill, described the bishops’ deployment of parishes to gather signatures as “fairly reprehensible.”
“To use church resources, in advancing a measure that promotes discrimination, is incredibly disappointing,” Murray said. “As a gay person, and a Catholic, I can understand their refusal to perform (gay) marriages. Using the church in promoting a referendum . . . is very disappointing.”
The bishops noted that, under the state’s domestic partnership law (which the Catholic Church lobbied against), same sex couples “already enjoy the rights and privileges of married couples.”
Anne Levison, a former judge and co-owner of the Seattle Storm, and leader in the marriage equality campaign, responded that the bishops’ letter is a case of clerical error.
“Of all institutions, the Church should understand why domestic partnerships can’t replace marriage,” said Levinson. “Marriage is so much more than a collection of legal rights. The essence of marriage remains the same whether the two people are straight or gay or lesbians: Two people affirming their love and commitment to each other.”
A statement in the letter caught my eye:
In their letter, the bishops specifically deny that refusing marriage to same-sex couples equates to discrimination — an argument made by Gov. Christine Gregoire, a Catholic, in arguing for marriage equality.
“Treating different things differently is not unjust discrimination,” the bishops claim. “Marriage can only be between a man and a woman because of its unique ends, purpose and place in society. The word ‘marriage’ isn’t simply a label that can be attached to different types of relationships.
That phraseology of "treating different things differently" has been uttered several times by former National Organization for Marriage head Maggie Gallagher.
Just more ammunition for those of us who think that NOM is a sham group created and backed by the Catholic Church.
But there will be more on that later . . .
6 comments:
I'd really like to know which "unique ends" he speaks of, there is nothing "unique" to marriage except the intention to try and classify it as a heterosexuals only club.
In states where citizens can put initiatives on ballots, we need to launch propositions that would deny tax-exempt status to any church or religious organization that participates in ballot initiatives in specified ways, including gathering signatures, etc. I suspect that such initiatives would pass, or at least put the fear of God into the LDS and Roman Catholic Churches.
So according to this, I should not marry my opposite-sex mate because we are not having children. That's the only reason for "marriage" to exist, right?
Please enlighten the Catholic church, who with their unmarried priests and nuns have NO BUSINESS dictating how relationships are defined in the first place.
By that logic, it would not be discrimination to treat people with different skin colors differently.
Oh yes, enabling pedophile priests to abuse children is okay but same-sex marriage is an abomination. It's no wonder I left the church decades ago.
What I can't understand is why churches who openly push and support these petitions get to keep their tax exempt status? I really wish there was a way to force the government to uphold the law. If these churches want to be involved in politics then they sure as heck should pay taxes.
“Treating different things differently is not unjust discrimination,” Whereas in fact treating different things differently is precisely unjust discrimination. The black and the white, the Jew and the gentile, the gay and the straight should be treated the same before the law despite their differences.
Post a Comment