Vatican digs in as same-sex marriage advances
VATICAN CITY (AP) - The Vatican is digging in after gay marriage initiatives scored big wins this week in the U.S. and Europe, vowing to never stop insisting that marriage can only be between a man and a woman.
In a front-page article in Saturday's Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, the Holy See sought to frame itself as the lone voice of courage in opposing initiatives to give same-sex couples legal recognition. In a separate Vatican Radio editorial, the pope's spokesman asked sarcastically why gay marriage proponents don't now push for legal recognition for polygamous couples as well.
Catholic teaching holds that homosexuals should be respected and treated with dignity but that homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered." The Vatican also opposes same-sex marriage, insisting on the sanctity of marriage between a man and woman as the foundation for society.
The Vatican's anti-gay marriage media blitz came after three U.S. states approved same-sex marriage by popular vote in the election that returned Barack Obama to the U.S. presidency, Spain upheld its gay marriage law, and France pushed ahead with legislation that could see gay marriage legalized early next year.
"One might say the church, at least on this front, has been defeated," L'Osservatore Romano wrote. "But that's not the case."
The article insisted that Catholics were putting up a valiant fight to uphold church teaching in the face of "politically correct ideologies invading every culture of the world" that are backed by institutions like the United Nations, which last year passed a non-binding resolution condemning anti-gay discrimination.
"The church is called to present itself as the lone critic of modernity, the only check ... to the breakup of the anthropological structures on which human society was founded," it said.
Vatican spokesman the Rev. Federico Lombardi, for his part, said gays can have their rights protected by means other than through legal marital recognition. He stressed that children should have a right to say they have a father and a mother.
"If not, then why not contemplate freely chosen polygamy, and naturally so as to not discriminate, polyandry?" he asked sarcastically. Polyandry is when a woman has two or more husbands.
"As a result, don't expect the church to stop insisting that society recognizes a specific place for marriage between a man and woman," he said.
The U.S. election had been closely watched at the Vatican because of the strong divisions that erupted during the campaign between the Obama administration and U.S. bishops over gay marriage, which Obama endorsed in May. The administration and bishops clashed more vehemently over Obama's health care mandate requiring nearly all U.S. health insurance plans to cover contraception, which the church opposes.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said the contraception mandate - which exempts houses of worship but applies to faith-affiliated employers - is a violation of religious freedom.
The Vatican's reaction to Obama's re-election was tinged with such lingering criticism, with Pope Benedict XVI congratulating Obama and praying that the ideals of freedom and justice continue to be upheld.
Lombardi went further urging the administration to respect essential values in "promoting a culture of life and religious freedom" - Vatican buzzwords referring to abortion, contraception and the insurance mandate.
It was a far cry from the Vatican's enthusiastic response to Obama's election in 2008. Then, the pope termed Obama's election an "historic occasion" in a personal note of congratulations sent right after he won, a break with traditional Vatican protocol that usually sees official telegrams of congratulations sent on inauguration day.
In a front-page article in Saturday's Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano, the Holy See sought to frame itself as the lone voice of courage in opposing initiatives to give same-sex couples legal recognition. In a separate Vatican Radio editorial, the pope's spokesman asked sarcastically why gay marriage proponents don't now push for legal recognition for polygamous couples as well.
Catholic teaching holds that homosexuals should be respected and treated with dignity but that homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered." The Vatican also opposes same-sex marriage, insisting on the sanctity of marriage between a man and woman as the foundation for society.
The Vatican's anti-gay marriage media blitz came after three U.S. states approved same-sex marriage by popular vote in the election that returned Barack Obama to the U.S. presidency, Spain upheld its gay marriage law, and France pushed ahead with legislation that could see gay marriage legalized early next year.
"One might say the church, at least on this front, has been defeated," L'Osservatore Romano wrote. "But that's not the case."
The article insisted that Catholics were putting up a valiant fight to uphold church teaching in the face of "politically correct ideologies invading every culture of the world" that are backed by institutions like the United Nations, which last year passed a non-binding resolution condemning anti-gay discrimination.
"The church is called to present itself as the lone critic of modernity, the only check ... to the breakup of the anthropological structures on which human society was founded," it said.
Vatican spokesman the Rev. Federico Lombardi, for his part, said gays can have their rights protected by means other than through legal marital recognition. He stressed that children should have a right to say they have a father and a mother.
"If not, then why not contemplate freely chosen polygamy, and naturally so as to not discriminate, polyandry?" he asked sarcastically. Polyandry is when a woman has two or more husbands.
"As a result, don't expect the church to stop insisting that society recognizes a specific place for marriage between a man and woman," he said.
The U.S. election had been closely watched at the Vatican because of the strong divisions that erupted during the campaign between the Obama administration and U.S. bishops over gay marriage, which Obama endorsed in May. The administration and bishops clashed more vehemently over Obama's health care mandate requiring nearly all U.S. health insurance plans to cover contraception, which the church opposes.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said the contraception mandate - which exempts houses of worship but applies to faith-affiliated employers - is a violation of religious freedom.
The Vatican's reaction to Obama's re-election was tinged with such lingering criticism, with Pope Benedict XVI congratulating Obama and praying that the ideals of freedom and justice continue to be upheld.
Lombardi went further urging the administration to respect essential values in "promoting a culture of life and religious freedom" - Vatican buzzwords referring to abortion, contraception and the insurance mandate.
It was a far cry from the Vatican's enthusiastic response to Obama's election in 2008. Then, the pope termed Obama's election an "historic occasion" in a personal note of congratulations sent right after he won, a break with traditional Vatican protocol that usually sees official telegrams of congratulations sent on inauguration day.
God is a myth. I am left shaking my head wondering why people still buy into this nonsense in this day & age.  The Vatican is nothing but a breeding ground for greed, corruption, pedophiles, etc.
(Livefyre is not letting me post a response to a specific comment, so this is to work around that - seems to happen ALOT with this *new & improved* system...)
Â
alildifferent wrote:
"Religion is a complete waste of time and energy. Come on do you really believe some magical man exists in the sky waiting to judge your soul? Someday people will look back and laugh at how stupid the ancient humans were."
Â
Here is my response that Livefyre would not post:
Â
I disagree.
Â
I think some look at religion as a guide, a way to see outside their own lives to recognize how they can impact other's lives (for good or bad).
Â
I was raised in the Episcopal Church. I do not attend as often now as I would like as I am disabled, but I did not stop believing & acting on my faith just because I canont get to the front door every Sunday.
Â
I do "quiet good deeds", things that I know will impact other's lives for the better. I do not sing my own praises about it, I simply do it, knowing it is the right thing to do. I do not have much - but I know there are SO many in this world who have even less than I do and I know what I do can make a difference for them, make their lives a bit easier.
Â
It's like the story in the Bible about Jesus visiting the woman "in disguise" & being turned away, but then coming to her later & she lavished attention on him - and he admonished her for turning others who appeared needy away. You never know who's life you may make an impact on, with any & every action you take (or do not take).
Â
I would much rather make a positive impact - even if it is nothing more than a warm cup or coffee in their hands on a cold night, or a simple gesture such as holding a door open for them, wishing them a good day, or simply sharing a smile with them. I saw a poster that I think was very appropriate - it shows a woman sitting alone on a bench in the rain - and printed above her picture is said "Do not judge her - you do not know what storm I have tossed her into - God". One small kind gesture can make all the difference to SO many people - and I think that that is what the whole message behind the Bible & religion is.
Â
The Church's guidance for today's family is archaic. It comes from a time when if you did not have surviving children, you had no one to care for you in old age, if you did not have a husband or a wife, your life was difficult at best, impossible or a death sentence at the worst. We do not live in that world any longer. The strength of the family has changed from one of basic survival to one love and nurturing. We do not marry to carry on our name, we do not marry to have field hands and we no longer have to have 10 children so that we can ensure that a few of them may survive to adults. At least not in the US we dont. If we loose civilization it is guaranteed that these values would immediately become a matter of survival and our personal feelings would have to take a backseat. But we do have a civilization that can afford humanity at a level never known before.Â
It is long past time for the Catholic Church to step out of people's personal lives. Just a short time spent studying the history of that church provides sufficient evidence to make it abundantly clear the Catholic church is in no position to make recommendations on how people live their lives.
The Catholic Church condemns any sex outside marriage. They are not condemning Gay people anymore than Straight people. I hate PC and anti religious bigotry coming from the Gay community.
 @Telman@ I guess this is what I dont get, so they choose not recognize marriage outside being performed in their church like the Mormons do and move on..........really not so difficult. I guess I just dont understand unless they believe we'll all be blasted by God's wrath and they will be standing too close....
 @Susabelle Just remember that God loves all not just Straight and Gay. What we do in bed isn't the issue here really. It is about freedom speech and the right to discuss controversial issues freely without being shamed for one's beliefs. ⦠Peace
 @Susabelle You might want to read some books by Richard Rohar he is a Franciscan Monk and Mystic out of New Mexico. It will enlighten the person who know very little about the Catholic church and the movement with in.
 @Susabelle You have that right.
Â
 @Telman@ That was not intended to be an anti-religious statement. I do not wish to shame your religion, but likewise the GayLesbian community has been shamed by religion long enough. It is time to stop it.
If this were two-thousand years ago and Jesus was the living prophet the Catholic Church would be in the position of the Roman government. Which if anyone has read the Bible was not a particularly loving and God-like organization. Ironic.
 @Julia I wonder if JC would walk through the Vatican overturning tables like he did with his own religious leaders?
This coming from a religion that has now become known for molesting little boys? Last time I checked a male priest molesting a boy is a homosexual act.Â
Â
While I understand that the priests that committed those acts are the minority, it nevertheless shows that the Vatican has to practice what it preaches. There are several gay priests in the Catholic order.Â
Â
While I don't really care either way, this is the second time voters have approved Gay Marriage. It is time the opponents come to the fact that the majority wants equal rights for everyone.Â
An organization that hid pedophiles and child molesters for decades within its ranks has very little creditability with how I shape my life. It is hypocrisy to point fingers at gay marriage when the cover-ups and out of court settlements of priests molesting altar boys are brought to light. Then again this is the same organization that brought you the Inqusition and Indulgences of a few centuries ago and has not learned a lick of sense yet.
I don't think we should be so hard on the Catholic church. They recently admitted that the earth is round, and apologized to Da Vinci, so I'm sure eventually they'll come around. Give them a little time...
I wouldn't think that someone who believes in talking burning bushes, living in a big fish for 3 days and virgin births really have a right to criticize anyone else's lifestyle.
 @Blindman Actually, in all fairness the first two stories are Jewish (but have been co-opted by Christians who are clueless to the fact that the Old Testament is the Jewish Torah)
If anyone knows about marriage it's these guys, eh?
It's time for everyone to embrace the separation between church and state. It's there to protect both government and religion. Marriage is not owned by religion and has two different concepts. There is religious marriage and marriage by the state. The two need not be connected.
Â
The church can chose not to recognize gay marriage however as a matter of rights the state can not.
That's just what we need! A bunch of unmarried old men who may or may not bugger boys are exactly who I want marriage advice from! Time to tax these folks.
Who was it who said, years ago, "you no playa da game, you no make-a da rules"? George Carlin maybe?
Maybe, if gay couples can purchase an indulgence from the Vatican, they can be excused? After all you have direct access to God, so something can be worked out. WDYT?
 @Komo Dragon You can't buy indulgences anymore. BUT, you can cover up a Catholic sex scandal with a buy-off of media coverage.
Voice of courage?Where was their courage when their priests were raping alter boys?  Utterly empty suits when it comes to moral authority.
Â
Â
@NBA_Is_Useless Good priests and heterosexuals don't rape the same sex. Bad homosexuals priests do.
 @STK your wording is off here- you realize that you are implying that GOOD hetero priests only rape the opposite sex? I know you don't mean that, but your sentence reads that way.
With regard to pedophiles, be they priests or something else- the object is children, access and opportunity are required, and many do not care which gender they violate.
The church has been wrong before and it is wrong now. As my father says: "religion is the best of things and the worst of things".
"Catholic teaching holds that homosexuals should be respected and treated with dignity but that homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered."
Â
Let's discuss choir boys then shall we?
Hello, Vatican? Yes, America here...
Would you mind your own business, we can take care of ourselves
Thanks,
 - freepeople
 @TskSeattle So true ... wasn't there some sort of revolution or something at some point that may have separated us from the Catholic Church as our government ... hmmm ...
Wow. The Catholic church's positions on homosexual relationships are way to nuanced for me to sort out...
Hi Pedophile Hiders United (AKA the Vatican.)
Â
I'm a baptized Catholic that refuses to attend your churches in protest of your disgusting coverups AND voted to approve gay marriage as well.
Â
1-10 UMAD?
God's truth is unchanging and everlasting. However humans' understanding of that truth is finite and and forever growing. First, there is nothing in Sacred Scripture against homosexuality as we understand it. In fact, there are some parts of Sacred Scripture that affirm homosexuality and homosexual relationship, In fact, the Christian church has a long history of gay marriages sanctioned by the Vatican. See "Same Sex Unions in Premodern Europe," by Boswell. As the Presiding Bishop of an Independent Catholic denomination with a graduate theology degree from a Roman Catholic Seminary, I am saying the Roman Catholic church and other Christian churches are wrong. According to them the human understanding of God's truth stopped growing in the 13th century. Certainly the Roman and other churches are entitled to their beliefs. I do disagree when they push their beliefs on others or try to influence public policy. They should not be exempt trom paying taxes.
 @smokey307 I am an Atheist and I truly wish more Christians were like you- tolerant and very educated.
 @smokey307 Exactly!
Â
The Bible was 'divinely inspired,' but ultimately put down on paper by people. People with thier own opinions, biases and thoughts.
Frankly, the church should be able to practice marriage how they want and the rest of the world can do what they want. Wish people would be more open minded and tolerant to "minority" view points held by Catholics and Christians. Oh well. I guess the demand for open mindedness and tolerance doesn't apply to liberals. Religious groups should be able to believe what they want and practice accordingly. If someone wants to practice their religion, who are you to interfere. Go seek "marriage" outside of the religious institution.Â
@John Gault:Â
You tell them to "go seek marriage outside the religous institution". They did - that is what R74 was a;ll about. The RIGHTS of marriage, the civil laws involved, not the RITE of marriage. It was about seperating the two & recognizing that ALL people have a civil right to marry (SCOTUS< Loving v. Virginia), that "seperate but equal is NOT equal at all (Brown v. Board of Education; "everything but marriage"). It was & is about EQUALITY. The church is not & need not be involved.
 @John Gault I only stop tolerating it when any religious person wishes to turn religion into law.
 @John Gault And the Church CAN practice marriage as it sees fit........not one is saying anything different as a matter of fact, the Law states that Churches can perform weddings or not according to their own doctrine. What has happened is that now Gay/Lesbian couples can seek it inside a church that accepts it into their doctrine or at city hall with the same legal binding implications that were previously only available to an opposite sex couple.Â
 @Susabelle And then they can try to hire a wedding photographer that has religious objections to being involved in their ceremony and instead of "live and let live" they can try to force their view on her by lawsuit and maybe even put her out of business.
 @Susabelle You are entitled to your opinion but I hope you can at least understand why someone with strong religious convictions against same-sex marriages could not in good conscience lend their artistic vision to help facilitate a same-sex wedding ceremony.  Imagine being asked to do something similar at an event which you strongly object to.
 @Vertex  @jcman I know you disagree with my views on this, but honestly, there is a separation of church and state for a reason. I also believe that any business that refuses service to a couple based on this SHOULD be prosecuted. They are not performing a service "in the name of the Church" it is only normal commerce.
 @Julia Such a lawsuit has already happened, Julia.  And the couple deliberately tried to uncover the reason for objection by calling back a second time and posing as a straight couple.  The couple sued the photographer and won the case.  Apparently they weren't in to the whole "live and let live" thing....
 @jcman Unfortunately you are incorrect.  A lawsuit like this has already happened and it was not thrown out.  And the photographer lost.
 @two loons I never said the photographer would refuse business because they were gay.  I said she had religious objections to being involved in their CEREMONY.  Of course I would sell insurance or cars to gays. Â
 @Susabelle Why would any private business owner be stupid enough to say they don't approve of gay marriages so won't work for them? How hard is "I'm not available during that time?" You're really grasping at straws here to come up with a reason why someone's civil rights are going to make you a victim.
 @Vertex  @Susabelle If they sued the case would be thrown out. As a private business that's not open to the public, like a restaurant, they can chose whom they serve. It's the government that can't pick and chose.
 @Vertex  @Susabelle Or she can just put herself out of business by refusing to sell her product or service to anyone she deems immoral, but to do that, she will heave to be very careful. She can't tell them she's refusing to serve them for being gay, she'll have to make up a lie- you know, a moral one that keeps her from being sued. Meanwhile, a smart wedding photographer across town will be running a Ref. 74 Special offering a $74.00 package and spending that green spendable money that touched (gasp!) gay hands. Come on, now, do you know the sexual habits of your clients? Would you refuse to sell insurance to someone because they are gay? Would you refuse to sell a car to someone that is into bondage? Yeah, keep on righteously refusing to make money.
 @John Gault It's a government/legal institution to those who don't believe in God.
Well, maybe they should allow God to be the judge of what man does on earth and not put themselves up higher than that. This country was settled by people who wanted to get away from the control of the Catholic Church.