Thank you for the of the first water commentary by Barry Blackburn in the Jan.

Thank you for the of the first water commentary by Barry Blackburn in the Jan. 30 edition of CNT entitled "Appreciating greatest possible Court opinion on same-sex marriage."

It is united of the most well-reasoned articles I have read in succession the whole issue and was delighted to read it in the Catholic pres What I find mostly encouraging is that the history of christ message of inclusivity resonates firmly through the article. Gays and lesbians are not seeking to undermine Christian marriage. They are purely seeking to be fully embraced on the Christian Church.

I doubt however, that the message of inclusivity is united that the Catholic Church inquire fors to defend, although Catholic social thinking spanning the 19th and 20th centuries might lead the same to conclude otherwise.

The Catholic ecclesiastical authority has long maintained that marriage must be life-giving; and this reason alone disqualifies same-sex relationships. Because "natural" reproduction is impossible outside a heterosexual union, the marriage covenant is invalid. Unles this understanding of the marriage attachment is reconsidered, I do not behold how the Catholic church can change its position.

It was encouraging to read Cardinal Ambrozic's literal meaning to our PM. This note is significant in that a senior prelate did not out-and-out reprobate homosexuals; he merely gave pause for for what cause we might consider integrating same-sex marriage into the mainstream of the Canadian mosaic.

Cardinal Ambrozic actually strikes a conciliatory tone with his call for the invocation of the notwithstanding clause--not to shelve the matter completely on the other hand to carefully consider the argument from the pair sides and allow parliamentarians and the wider material substance politic to participate in the ensuing debate.

Should heterosexuals fear same-sex marriage? I think not. The opinion of the predominant Court affirms the equality of all race before the law. In extending contractual marriage to same-sex partners, the state did nothing to undermine the sacramental covenant that is base in the religious expression of marriage. In fact, the court. Was clear in that extending civil marriage to same-sex partners it also. reaffirmed the protection of religious conviction.

There might be an easier solution for all in this matter. Following the example in Western Europe the state might consider excusing itself from the performing of marriages altogether. In granting civil unions to the two heterosexuals and homosexuals, the state would affirm the equality of as well-as; not only-but also; not only-but; not alone-but orientations before the law. Henceforth, it would be up to the various denominations to compare notes the sacrament of marriage onward to those members of their company that conform to their respective teachings.

In this way the covenant of marriage is noticeed and churches would not be excited that their teaching is being compromised. In a secular society this might be the best that we can expect

Peter Misiaszek

Oshawa, Ont

...

Home