News

Marriage for all ?

Marriage for all ?

The Gay Flag

Bern, Switzerland [Raffaele Battista; CD EUDNews]. Same-sex marriage, also known as gay marriage or equal marriage, is marriage between two persons of the same biological sex or gender identity.

February 20, 2013 | Dr. Raffaele Battista; Wikipedia; CD EUDNews;

Bern, Switzerland [Raffaele Battista; CD EUDNews]. Same-sex marriage, also known as gay marriage or equal marriage, is marriage between two persons of the same biological sex or gender identity.

Since 2001, eleven countries (Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, South Africa, Sweden) and several sub-national jurisdictions (parts of Brazil, Mexico and the United States) allow same-sex couples to marry. Bills legalizing same-sex marriage have been proposed, are pending, or have passed at least one legislative house in Andorra, Colombia, Finland, France, Luxembourg, Nepal, New Zealand, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, and Uruguay as well as in the legislatures of several sub-national jurisdictions (in Scotland as well as parts of Australia, Mexico, and the United States).

The recognition of same-sex marriage is a political, social, civil-rights and religious issue in many nations, and debates continue to arise over whether same-sex couples should be allowed marriage, be required to hold a different status (a civil union), or not have any such rights.

Same-sex marriages can be performed in a secular civil ceremony or in a religious setting. Various religious groups around the world conduct same-sex marriages; for example: Quakers, the Metropolitan Community Church, Reform and Conservative Jews, Wiccans, and Druids tradition.

Christiane Taubira (Minister of Justice in France):"We are honored and proud to have passed this first step...". The reason for pride shown by the French Minister of Justice is determined by the positive outcome of the vote on Article 1 of the law on gay marriage. The opinion manifested by the French Minister conforms to what is now a majoritarian trend.

To tell the truth, even in the transalpine country, the protests are not missed. The most effective button on which press, to give breath to protest without incurring the risk of being accused of homophobia and gaining the consequent title of obscurantistreactionary, is arguably the controversy on the adoption of children by such couples. I suppose that we all agree on the fact that gay parents are anomalous; this definition is not given according to any single religious code, but by natural laws. Therefore, a decision, so rich of implications, should not be taken by any sort of institution, but rather, by the child itself. Obviously, a child of two or three, is not able to decide anything. This is why, we have to follow what nature dictates; the verdict of which, no doubt, is that a child must have a father and a mother.

In terms of individual rights, the homosexual choice, from wherever it may be originated, should remain within the confines of ethics and moral self-determination of adult people. The person involved will be held responsible at all social, religious, and spiritual levels. In this sense, I honestly believe that every discrimination, no matter if political, social, or occupational in nature should be seen as such. But when it comes to the adoption of children, well, it seems to me that the gay community are looking to win big. The fact that they have obtained, in many countries of the world, the right to marry, seems to me more than an adequate solution.

The mere calling of homosexual unions, marriage, is already, in itself, an anomalous use of terminology which pertains to heterosexual standards. We can not mention an homosexual marriage without generating friction at both etymological and semantic levels. The Latin noun matrimonium, with its root mater (mother), makes clear that the goal of the institution is the generation of children, or at least, the presence in the couple of a female figure. But, when it comes to child adoption, I honestly think we come to the breaking point. To further this idea, I call on the principle of diversity; workhorse of the gay movement! Nature (without specifically mentioning any divinity) decided that procreation is an experience that involves a male and a female. Unless you bring legal proceedings into nature by accusing it of homophobia, I do not think a state law can ever change the fact that a child has the natural right to a father and a mother… In the name of freedom and respect for childhood, heterosexual and homosexual, let us ask ourselves, what is good and what is better, based on the strength of information that comes from common sense, from nature, and, for those in faith, the Holy Scriptures.

pictures: 1. The Gay Flag (Wikipedia); 2. Dr. Raffaele Battista, Librarian and Teacher at Facoltà Avventista di Teologia Villa Aurora, Florence;

Back to list