Am I the only one that did not see this coming? This week, on Oct. 6, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand appellate rulings in favor of same-sex “marriage.” I did not realize the keg of dynamite had been lit and was just waiting for the Supreme Court to allow the explosion of same-sex marriages in this country. Previously, it was just one firecracker at a time. Call me uniformed. Or busy. And oh so badly wanting this all to just go away.
The decision to deny the appeal of five states against same-sex marriage means the total of states where homosexuals can marry one another has reached twenty-four. It’s expected that six additional states that are under the jurisdiction of the three appeals courts, will also fall. If you are counting, that will make thirty.
This is what we shall do.
We will stay strong, keep our heads up high, and think: Well, what did you expect, to drive off into the sunset in an RV’s or rather to march to the beat of a Catholic drummer?
Every single one of us knows saint stories of Catholic martyrs. Sure, back when we vowed that we too would die for our faith, we did not really think it would happen. And so far, in this country, it isn’t happening. At least not physical deaths. Yet, we are dying inside. It’s hard to explain that we really do love the person but hate the sin. The hardest part is trying to explain what sin is when so many people are celebrating it.
We can take comfort in being Catholic. Our Church is staying the course—always has and always will. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement: “Millions of Americans had looked to the court with hope, that these unjust judicial decisions might be reversed. The Court’s action fails to resolve immediately the injustice of marriage redefinition and, therefore, should be of grave concern to our entire nation.”
That makes me feel a bit better. We are not alone. The whole world is not going crazy, just large sections of it. I’m sitting here in North Dakota, a state that has held strong to the legal and moral definition of marriage as being a union between one man and one woman. And now? We will have to hunker down and wait.
God’s Way is Still the Right Way
Legal experts suggest that the court’s decision will reverberate and shake loose all the old fashioned marriage laws to redefine marriage to mean something it never has meant before in the history of the world. The prediction is that same-sex couples will have their way. But having our own way is not the way to heaven. So, we will continue to cling to God’s way.
As we navigate conversations with a liberal culture, we will not betray God’s teaching on marriage between a man and a woman, where the two shall become one in the way God intended. It’s a temperamental crowd that propels the homosexual movement, a tsunami that has swept many out to sea. We will keep loving and praying for all. We will take comfort in our Catholic Church and celebrate that our fortress has not been also been sucked in by the cultural ripe tides.
We will stand firm and fight for our religious freedom, that means not being penalized for speaking the truth about marriage.
It’s a social experiment doomed to failure. I am just so very, absolutely, and completely grateful that I am a member of the Catholic Church who will never accommodate a redefinition of marriage. So, there is much to be thankful for. Imagine if we belonged to another Christian Church where marriage has been redefined. What a lonely feeling that would be. Instead, we are in the company of over 2,000 years of Catholic leadership that has stayed the course. We are in the company of angels and the saints that have gone before us. And we are in the company of Catholics, who know, that regardless of what the Supreme Court rules, God rules.
No, I never imagined such a world when I was a kid. But I did read about places of persecution and anti-Christian treatment. It’s just that, well, darn it, it didn’t have to be this way. But then, that’s been true since Eve and Adam did not have to eat the apple.
When the sun comes up tomorrow, we will still be able to practice our religion, go to Church, say our prayers, read Catholic news and resist the current. We can even get a cheeseburger or Chick fil A, shop at Hobby Lobby and pray in front of an abortion clinic.
Just don’t stress. God is in control. He is allowing crazy things to happen, but God is still God and we can take comfort in his never-changing ways. He’ll eventually let everyone else in on this too. In the meantime, “May the Lord of peace give you his peace at all times and in every way. May the Lord be with all of you, (2 Thessalonians 3:16).
43 thoughts on “I Didn’t See It Coming”
The problem with the marriage question that homosexual activists are totally dishonest about what marriage is and what it has always been understood to be. Jews, Hindus, Christians, Buddhists, ancient people and moderns all understood marriage to be a sexual union between a man and a woman. It predates this country and all others. Marriage has always been understood to be a public union, a comprehensive union, a union that involved reproductive type sex, a union that was oriented toward having and raising a family because that’s what sex between men and women leads to. That’s why when the fourteenth amendment was passed there wasn’t a rush of homosexuals to “marry” in 1868 or in 1968 for that matter. Those people who claim that the fourteenth amendment supports them know that the reason no one was claimed marriage was possible between people of the same sex in times past is because they realized marriage had to involve the capacity for actual sex.
For all of the time America has existed, no one has ever been denied marriage because they are attracted to the same sex, so long as they can find someone of the opposite sex to marry them. They are not discriminated against by refusing to change the definition of marriage to accommodate their desires. They don’t want what marriage is, they want marriage to change from being a public, comprehensive, reproductive type sexual union, to an emotional one.
You hit the nail on the head. Marriage should be be changed to mean something different than it always has throughout history.
“We can take comfort in being Catholic. Our Church is staying the course—always has and always will.”
You have perhaps posted this article too soon. I am, of course, referring to the “Relatio post disceptationem” that the Vatican released just a few days ago.
Pingback: Stephen Hawking and The Heavens - BigPulpit.com
Just so that you can’t say that you didn’t see it coming:
http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/davidbadash/_an_earthquake_new_vatican_document_suggests_embracing_gifts_and_qualities_of_gay_people
I can’t move to North Dakota but it sure is tempting! Thanks for encouraging us Patti to hang in there. We can still practice our faith, and witness to others when God gives us the opportunity!
It’s hard to explain that we really do love the person but hate the sin. The hardest part is trying to explain what sin is when so many people are celebrating it.
Actually, the hardest part is to disabuse people of the silly notion that homosexuals are committing a “sin” when they do what they do. For one thing, it is not anyone elses business what they choose to do together. And secondly, they pose no threat to traditional marriage or to anyone’s faith. The whole thing is ridiculous. These people don’t need to be “saved” or “forgiven” or any other foolish thing people want to do to or for them.
And so, you make my point.
Yes. Your point is that according to your religion, active homosexuals are “sinning” and need to be told what it means to be in “sin”. Hello. That’s your religious belief. It has nothing to do with reality. It is a religious belief. Why don’t you just leave those people alone? If they want to marry, what is that to you? It is silly. That’s what it is.
I am not picking on homosexuals. The Catholic Church teaches that sex outside of marriage is a sin. That includes a lot more than just homosexuals. Just because a teaching is difficult does not mean it’s not true.
The Catholic Church teaches that sex outside of marriage is a sin.
Well. This raises a few issues. First, if gays marry, then it is not sex outside of marriage. Second, what the Catholic Church teaches is neither here nor there to most modern people. Third, Catholics have no right to try to tell people what is a “sin”. Sin is a concept held by a few religions. Crime is what matters. Not sin. If it is a crime, that is a problem. If it is a sin, that is just an opinion.
Bill,
Catholics aren’t try to tell people what is a sin. The Church is simply telling the truth. Having homosexual sex is not healthy for the human body. Just look at cancer statistics for gay men. I am sorry to be vulgar, but anal cancer is a grave threat to homosexual men, and their life expectancy is many years less than heterosexual men. It’s not what the body was meant to do, Bill.
People can love everyone—-celibacy and chastity to not mean that one loves anyone less.
Most important to me, Bill, is the lie that children raised by same sex partners are all fine—–there’s a big elephant in the room. Where is my mommy (the surrogate who had me so that two men can be my parents)? Where is my daddy (the sperm donor who was paid so that one of my mommies could get pregnant)?
Kids need and deserve mom and a dad, not two daddies or two mommies who decide to have a baby made for them.
It doesn’t matter how many people think that same sex “marriage” is ok. The majority of Americans once thought that slavery was ok, and SCOTUS once ruled that life is not viable before the 3rd trimester. They are all wrong, and a majority does not make it right.
A very apt and logical reply. What is missing from this piece however is a
timeline of sorts. Patti’s …sky is falling scenario leaves out the prognosis and
coming pathology of such a change of values. People may find it difficult
to take this seriously unless you can extrapolate an end game. If you light
a fire in a drought stricken forest and it goes unchecked it is almost easy to
project how much will be burned by running real time scenarios – which beg
the question ( that I have asked numerous times from many CS bloggers )
take me one year, five years, ten years and 50 into a future such a change
same sex marriage will engender. If one can’t put their gut feelings, can’t see(r) the final damning outcome, then, maybe there isn’t one. What is being tacitly
said here is that America will be ruined. Tell us how ; and then we can tick them off as they appear. And then you can say:I told you so. Or … you won’t be able to say that.at all.
The Catholic Church is not the Center for Disease Control or Childrens Protective Services. In that same sex couples get married in either civil ceremonies or at churches that perform same sex marriages, there is no reason for Catholics to involve themselves in the gay marriage argument. The Catholic Church has enough problems keeping its own clergy out of trouble. It is in no position to judge homosexuals, many of whom are professional people and productive members of society. They are found in every occupation and even in religious institutions. Catholics have no right to hassle them. Period.
Bill S. you say: The Catholic Church has enough problems keeping its own
clergy out of trouble. Bill… it is heartbreaking as a Catholic to
know that there was clerical abuse of children in the past – and I can
only trust that it is being addressed, even as a I type. The fact of
the matter is, Bill, there is abuse in every religious affiliation –
it’s just that the media chooses to report the Catholic abuse because we
are – understandably – held to a higher standard. It isn’t only
Catholics who are “hassling” (your words) homosexual people claiming the “right” to be married – there are people from most every affiliation who are upset with the “marriage” issue. Marriage is a union between a MAN and a WOMAN. Period.
In this country, the truth is that something is legal or illegal based on a determination of the legal system. State laws that define marriage as being “between a MAN and a WOMAN. Period” are illegal as has been confirmed by the highest court that has ruled on it.
You can try to place your religious beliefs above the laws of the land but the first amendment guarantees that you will never be able to impose your rules above those laws.
That’s a good thing. Not a bad thing. How would you like to live under shariah law?
Bill,
So when slavery was legal in our country, was it the truth?
No, there is a higher touchstone for truth (thank God!)
Just because something is legal does not make it true.
Slavery was accepted by the Church. The human race is learning as we go along. We know more today than we knew in the past. It can be accepted as truth, based on court decisions, that marriage equality is a right protected under the constitution. Your idea of the truth, regardless of whether you get it from Leviticus or from something someone said that Jesus said is incorrect.
Just because something is deemed “legal” doesn’t make it worthy or true… Our culture is so used to being fed lies, that we don’t even question them anymore. People don’t know where to go to seek out truth because they are lied to from every corner of the earth. People have no trust in anyone or anything anymore, because we are all fed lies, and people don’t want to research until they find an answer that makes more sense. People don’t take time to think about an issue long enough to weigh the pros and cons and think about the consequences of the decisions that are made over the long term.
“Just because something is deemed “legal” doesn’t make it worthy or true.”
I agree. But we all need to start somewhere. When I was young, I used to ponder what were the chances that I would have lived in the greatest country in the world AND would be a follower of the greatest religion in the world. To this day, I’m still amazed at that combination in that the U.S. really does appear to be the greatest and Catholicism is the most followed.
But I have come to question the reality of that notion. And you are right. We do need to do more research to find out who is lying and who is telling the truth.
Cynthia Millen “I am sorry to be vulgar, but anal cancer is a grave threat to homosexual men, and their life expectancy is many years less than heterosexual men. It’s not what the body was meant to do, Bill. ”
Anal cancer is caused by the same strains of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) that cause cervical cancer in women. HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection…..so by extension ALL sex should be outlawed because it straight women it causes cervical cancer….same virus except cervical cancer is a thousand times more prevalent than anal cancer.
According to the Catholic Church it is sex outside of marriage because marriage is a union, joined by God. Sexual relations express both love and an openness to life. Sex between homosexuals can never create life.
I guess the only appropriate response to that is “so what?”
There is no acceptable reason for Catholics to get involved in the gay marriage issue.
But Bill, it will involved us.
As a Catholic school teacher, I teach what my Church teaches. When a child of a same sex couple comes to my school, I will of course love and teach that child, but what his/her two mommies/two daddies have done is morally wrong. It’s not the same as divorced couples who remarry. Everyone agrees that divorce is a sad thing—something that we don’t want to happen—-and so when we have children of divorced families in our schools, everyone accepts that we will teach that marriage is a lifelong commitment and divorce is not a welcome or good outcome. But when we have same sex couples insisting that their children attend our school (and they will have every right to do that), and we teach that homosexual acts are wrong, what will happen? We will be told that since same sex marriage is “legal” that the parents won’t want us to teach that to their child? Already, Catholic adoption services have been closed because they do not allow adoptions for same sex couples.
More importantly, the entire issue of custody is going to blow up. As a lawyer (b.c.– before children), I know that the child custody issues are very painful and ugly. We have kids in our school who go back and forth from Mom and Dad three or four times a week. What happens (and it has already happened in the UK) when parent #3 is recognized and comes into the picture. With same sex couples who have children, there is always a parent #3. What does a school do with that?
Most crucially, what in the hell does a child do when he/she wonders who mommy or who daddy really are? Was my dad just a sperm donor who mommy paid? Was my mommy paid to be the womb for my daddies? What kind of statement is that for a child. Its crap and the same sex crowd who is promoting this is completely selfish and short-sighted. A child deserves better.
I will get off my soap box, but when you see the agony that kids go through with a “simple” heterosexual divorce, we are in for a disaster.
Patti – well said… your article is spot-on. Thank you for your insights. I look forward to more articles on this topic. God bless you, Patti – and thank you for standing strong in truth!
Thank you for standing strong in truth? The truth is that we our governed under a constitution and its amendments. The truth is that, since June 2013, marriage equality has been ruled to be guaranteed under that constitution (the same constitution that guarantees your religious freedom, which you think is being denied to you when you don’t get your way).
The truth is that states cannot deny the people their constitutional rights as per the 14th amendment.
Therefore, the truth is that gays have an inalienable right to marry. I don’t know what your idea of truth is. But it probably isn’t what passes for truth here.
Children are being denied their rights to have both a mother and father, If you’re going to keep declaring that this is all about rules of equality, please explain why the “equality” of the same sex adults who chose to bring a child into the world, out weigh the rights of the child who had no part in being brought forth into the world. If that child is not given any rights, what does that say as a society? Are children really worth that little to us? Do our wants and needs really outweigh those of a child that need special care and attention, from the people who are supposed to love them and put their children’s needs ahead of their own? Please tell me how this is equality for all? There will never be perceived equality for everyone. There is always going to be a group of people who will claim to be victims. As we give in to some of these absurd claims, only more and more absurd claims will come forth as we create more and more new and varied victim classes that we must then grant “equality” to. Where will you be willing to draw the line and say, this is fine, but the next issue is not?
Whether your arguments have merit or not has no relevance to the simple matter at hand. A same sex couple living in this country has the same constitutional right to marry as does an opposite sex couple. No circuit court has ruled differently. In fact, since the Windsor decision, only one district court in backward Loisiana has ruled otherwise and that will soon be corrected.
If you remove religion from the equation, this isn’t even that hotly contested an issue. You don’t respect “worldly wisdom”. Your religion thrives on criticizing it. Therefore, I can’t use it to make my point to you.
You didn’t even make an attempt to answer my question. Why do the “rights” of the couple override the rights of the children who have no say in being brought into that situation?
What you raise is not even an issue. The people who want to marry are the only two that matter. It is THEIR constitutional right. I don’t have to tell you that children have less rights and unborn children have none. You do the math. You want it to be some other way that suits your priorities. Ain’t gonna happen.
I’m just trying to get a rational explanation as to why a person has less dignity and no rights due to their age or the fact that they happen to not have been born yet. There has yet to be anyone who has ever given a rational explanation as to why one party has a right to determine whether the other lives or dies and its not considered murder. I also have yet to receive a rational explanation as to why the children created through artificial means have no right to their natural parents, both mother and father.
I’m just trying to get a rational explanation as to why a person has less dignity and no rights due to their age or the fact that they happen to not have been born yet.
You have this strange notion that same sex partners don’t have a right to marry for reasons that are speculative at best. You are raising issues that do not outweigh the constitutional rights of the couples seeking to marry. Yes. The other rights you are raising are of less significance. That’s just the way it is. Deal with it.
Boom. There it is. So if a child manages to survive the womb it has “some” rights but to hell with it until it actually exits the vagina….it’s merely a “thing” whose only worth is determined by another person’s desire to want that “thing”.
You see, once that mind set was accepted as “the way it is” then anything is possible. God will not force Himself on us and once we (collectively as a people) turn our backs to Him then whatever beautiful version of hell and a Brave New World we unleash upon ourselves is our own fault.
This is a brave new world. But we still have “God is great” (Allahu Akba) freaks to contend with at home and abroad and Jesus freaks trying to hijack our legal system.
But when we have same sex couples insisting that their children attend our school (and they will have every right to do that), and we teach that homosexual acts are wrong, what will happen?
What will happen is that you will be disseminating hurtful information for no good reason. Why would you have to teach children that homosexual acts are wrong?
More importantly, you would be the first to complain if your freedom of religion were taken away. You would refer to the first amendment and the constitution. Yet you are perfectly ok denying life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to others.
That marriage equality is guaranteed under the constitution has been a given since the Windsor ruling in June 2013. The 14th amendment prohibits states from denying the people their rights under the constitution. State laws banning gay marriage have been determined to violate that amendment in every circuit court thus far. Only a backward Louisiana district court has ruled against gay marriage since the Supreme Court ruled that it is a constitutional right. That should soon be reversed by the circuit court. Only if a circuit court goes against the findings of other circuit courts would the supreme court get involved. All that is left to do is for every circuit court rule accordingly when the cases get to them. Then every state will have to comply with the 14th amendment. And I’m not interested in old supreme court decisions that have since had to be corrected. They got this one right.
So just as you insist on your rights, gays have every right to insist that theirs be respected as well. The Catholic Church is not respecting those rights and can hide behind the first amendment to avoid prosecution.
Long ago what was the Supreme Court became the Uber Legislature; and if you have 5 votes you can effect anything, whether it is the will of the people or not. For example, you can say a black person is property and not a legal person (did you know Dred Scott’s wife was pregnant and her unborn child also was “property”?); you can say an unborn child is not a legal person and you can create the “right to abortion” hidden in the shadows of some amendment by our Founding Fathers so that a Mom-Doc combo can torture a child and kill the child; you can say marriage is between a person and a chimp —or whatever you want if you have 5 votes. What they say will pass as you so well remind us, Patti. Thanks for the Spiritual pep talk. Just like Noah in the Bill Cosby sketch when Noah here’s the first thunder and rain, I try to say “You and me, Lord.” Guy McClung, San Antonio
I think that many people saw that SCOTUS would not consider any appeals to state bans on gay marriage. I think it’s a matter of short time that 30 will become 50. For the government (of and by the people) gay marriage is a constitutional issue based upon the principle of equal protection under the law. Government and law derives from the people.
SCOTUS makes decisions on constitutional bases, not moral ones. The RCC church make its moral stance on gay marriage, SCOTUS makes a constitutional stance. No one is forcing the RCC and its ministers to perform gay ceremonies, now will they ever. The people and a majority of Catholics support gay marriage…this is government by the people. The RCC should believe what it believes, but it is not a reflection of the beliefs of the country…that’s ok. The other 20 states will quickly fall into line…I would guarantee it. Like I said SCOTUS makes constitutional decisions not moral ones. From my own experience, I know that the law and morality and two separate entities which rarely intersect,
Well, I’m sorry to say that Phil, among many others (myself included), turned out to be a” prophet”of astonishing accuracy; there was no doubt in my mind that the country at large, and the subsequently the Supreme Court was headed in this direction; I sensed it months ago.From a civil/constitutional perspective, it was inevitable. I can only say to Ms . Armstrong: What exactly did/do you expect the Roman Catholic Church to do? I’ll tell you what I’ve told my Christian brothers and sisters who are equally dismayed:Welcome to what democracy really looks like! The United States is NOT a theocracy, and the churches are NOT in charge of marriage, at least not in THIS particular governmental construct. The fact of the matter is that the U.S .Supreme Court has set this Nation on a course of no return, so…hang on to Almighty God’s Hand, and hang on for the ride!!!!
The problem with the “constitutional” perspective that they are using as a guise to support their decision is that it doesn’t equate to equality for all. The children are no longer protected by the state when the people that are supposed to have their best interests at heart don’t (the parents.) By encouraging these couples to create children by unnatural means, and putting them into homes and family situations where they are not in anyway connected to both of their biological parents, is going to cause more damage than good in the long run. We like to believe that with “love” these children will be just fine. Maybe they will be just fine, but will they ever be able to thrive to their full potential and be the best versions of themselves, when there is always a part of them missing. These kids are going to have natural desires to seek out their real parents, and will spend a significant portion of their lives dwelling on the could have, should haves of their lives. Love means doing what is right for the good of the other person. Our society believes that “love” is the emotions that supposedly satisfy our own selfish desires. Our society is only going to see more ruin until sanity once again prevails. It was the Catholic church that brought us out of the dark ages before, and the Catholic church will again be there proclaiming the truth when people finally are ready to come out of these dark ages. Its funny that we call this a period of enlightenment, when the world is growing darker all the time. The light will not fade completely as Christ won’t let it. There are going to be many new saints that rise in the years ahead, who will be able to teach truth and guide the nations forward into a path more closely aligned with God’s will.
Seriously, “Me”? “Saints guide the nations”??? What fantasy world are YOU living in?
@ME, The USA is a constitutional democracy. not a theocracy. God is not mentioned once (also Jesus), anywhere in the constitution, except for the date A.D. which is a common convention in those days instead of C.E. Government by the people, for the people…the people decide. Although many people may believe in God’s will, it has no place in the constitution. If something is declared constitutionally valid, it is legal….period. The constitution is not a Catholic, Christian, Hebrew, Skik, Islam expression of morality. The law is at times not consistent with moral principles, and I do not refer to abortion….that is the nature of a democracy, the will of the people.
The Supreme Court has been on the wrong side of morality and history before. Perhaps this is a way for is to galvanize and renew our faith. For a long time, it has been far too easy to live in the secular world as a Catholic, and the lines became fuzzy. Each of us now has to choose and then muster courage to stay the course if we choose to truly follow Him.
Most of all, I feel sad for people with SSA (same sex attraction). This “marriage” thing that is so politically correct now is all a big lie, a feel-good falsehood. It is not truth.
The children will suffer the most.
I too take comfort in the Barque of Peter! But really….the Supreme Court 9 are supposed to be the guardians of the contstitution! Haha! More like the guardians of political correctness in this case!