This really pisses me off.
An opinion letter from Saturday, July 15, 2006 (Newsday Long Island)
Nature says same-sex rights not OK
The State Court of Appeals rejected arguments that limiting marriage to a man and a woman violated the equal protection laws and discriminated against same-sex couples. Beyond history and child-welfare considerations, however, the court failed to cite the basic reason why — namely, the nature of the human person as male and female. This is a distinction that makes impossible any total interchangeability of man and woman. No man can bear a child; no woman can by and of herself conceive. It is nature, not opinion or long custom, that dictates marriage as exclusively a man-woman relationship.
Yet, the court left the final resolution of this issue to evolving public opinion expressed through decisions of the people’s representatives in the legislature. A necessary analysis of the nature of the human person does not even merit a mention.
It is this same nature of the human person that makes same-sex attraction always a dysfunction and homosexual relations by male or female always intrinsically wrong and never the foundation for a right. Persons have rights, and all persons have the same basic human rights. But a line of distinction drawn on the basis of (wrongful) activity is fundamentally different from that drawn on the basis of age, race, gender, disability or ethnic background.
Msgr. Daniel S Hamilton
Editor’s note: The writer is pastor of Our Lady of Perpetual Help Church
Must be an extremist. Personally, in my parish, I have never heard any of the priests or nuns speak out against homosexuality.
I find this insulting because I have so many good friends who are of this ‘unnatural’ state.
And homosexuality does occur in nature, not just in the human person.