Why are Catholics against Same Sex (Gay) Marriage, Gay Love (Sex)

In order to explore this subject I will have to look at distinct but related issues. If you feel you know the issues and want to get right to the marriage issue go here:

Why is the Catholic Church against gay love (sex)?

The Church has a history of poor charity to gay men and lesbians

Denial in not a good thing. It's not healthy. People who are same sex attracted need to have a place where they talk about it, whether it be with a spiritual advisor and/or in a group. Christians need to provide a clean, welcoming, "no-sex" space, where men and women who have had some "same sex" attraction can get well and explore God's gift of chastity, an environment that is supporting, loving and free of the "yuck!" factor around sexual issues.

However, there is a kind of denial which is even more unhealthy than being "in the closet." It is denial of God's call on all humans to chastity. In the gay community, there is a sentiment that anyone who practices chastity is in denial. I suggest it is the exact opposite. Chastity is total ownership of our human condition, and a total acceptance of God's ability to keep us chaste. He is actually quite good at that and without him it's almost impossible.

I've come to understand that helping people with same sex attraction is the Church's responsibility. We can no longer leave this to the gay community, because paradoxically, sex is not the answer to same sex attraction.

I think I can say that because I've been there and lived in the gay community.

Historically, Christians of all denominations have been uncharitable toward individuals who were same sex attracted. Earlier this century, some Christians set aside gay sex as a "yucky" kind of sin, as if it was worse than other sexual sin. This was wrong. Christians failed same sex attracted people in this capacity. If this is your situation, I want to say I'm sorry and I pray that healing will occur. Please forgive the lack of Charity. The Church is not complete without people with all kinds of struggles, including same sex attraction.

A lady in our Church has a struggle with singing loudly out of tune. She squawks loudly through the Mass singing a quarter tone out of pitch. As a musician, I find this painful but I'm still glad she's there. All are welcome, especially those with a good voices, and some of you guys have fabulous voices :-) We need all kinds of people in Church.

The 1994 Catechism called the Christian community to task about its lack of Charity to gay men and lesbians:

...They [gay men and lesbians] must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These people are called to fulfill God's will in their lives... (2358)

Are Christians intolerant, judgmental bigots?

Some Christians, including some Catholics, are intolerant, judgmental bigots. Just like some gay men and lesbians are judgmental, intolerant bigots. I was at a party for a co-worker who was gay, and one of his friends came up to me after finding out I was Christian and basically yelled at me for 30 minutes, because of my belief that the Bible has something to say to humanity today. He told me to throw out my "magic book of medieval myths." His partner told him to calm down.

On the other hand, many in both groups are not judgmental and intolerant at all. Like all human beings, we come in many different varieties. So I would suggest that blanket statements like "Christians are intolerant and judgmental" reveals the same kind of prejudice in the accuser, as the statement itself is condemning.

I was on a train the other day and a teenager was talking about Gay Marriage to her friend. She said "how can the Church talk about morality, while it practices intolerance and hate which are immoral?"

Buzzwords like "judgmental" and "intolerant" have been hijacked by what I consider a new religion, Relativism. I discuss the new meaning of tolerance, inclusiveness, hate and diversity here. Relativism is a philosophy that says things like "every person's truth has the same merit." Yet, many people who hold this philosophy don't think that there is any merit in a Christian person's truth. Today, we no longer talk about "absolute Truth." Everything is relative. So society talks about "Truth-s." In modern culture, one person's belief is as important as what someone else believes regardless of whether it is true or not. So modern society has abandoned truth, in favour of preference.

I have a blind friend who loves to jog. He was jogging across the street one morning. He didn't believe a car was coming. That was his "truth," and he believed it. Unfortunately, he was wrong. A car hit him and broke his leg.

This actually happened to my friend. If I was on the side of the road and saw the car coming towards him, would it be responsible for me to just stay silent and say to myself, "I shouldn't warn him about the car because I don't want to be intolerant and judgmental about his truth?" I think I have a responsibility to inform him that there is a car coming. The truth is not relative. There is absolute Truth. In this case it was that a car was coming. Relativism is not viable as a philosophy, paradoxically it leads to a kind of fundamentalism.

Secular Fundamentalism

I actually have something in common with many of the people who are advocating for the gay community. I have a big problem with the idea of fundamentalism in any form. Fundamentalist Christianity can be narrow, some fundamentalist Moslems blow up buildings, and communist fundamentalists killed millions to take over Russia. Paradoxically, many people in the gay community don't realize that they are practicing a new form of fundamentalism:

Secular Fundamentalism

This is also a very dangerous kind of fundamentalism. It turns human rights into a fundamentalist religion and makes human rights legislation its bible. And then it proceeds to misread human rights legislation to its own ends, the same way that some fundamentalist Moslems use the Koran to justify violence, the way some fundamentalist Christians justified slavery, and the way communist fundamentalists justified killing Christians because Christians were against the "common good."  I think all forms of fundamentalism are dangerous.

Secular Fundamentalism claims that we should go after absolute "human rights" even if they are "human wrongs." There is no such thing as "absolute human rights." It makes for a very lousy religion. Here are some examples of the injustices of "gay rights" legislation:

1. Scott Brockie owns a little printing shop. A gay organization asked him to publish some advertising. He politely refused because he could not, in good conscience, advance their agenda, given his Christian religious beliefs. He's currently $200,000 in debt from a court battle that he lost.
2. A Christian family had a small bed-and-breakfast business. Two men showed up at their door and wanted to spend the night together in the same bed. The family politely refused, based on their religious beliefs. The Canadian Human Rights Commission forced them to close their business for discriminating against a gay couple.
3. A small Christian newspaper was fined $5000 for refusing to print an ad for gay personals.
4. The Knights of Columbus have a Catholic reception hall in Vancouver. They politely refused to let their premises be used for a lesbian marriage reception, based on their mission statement that says they uphold Christian values. This Catholic organization was successfully sued by the Lesbians in front of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and the Catholic man who refused the rental was fired from his 14 year secular job at Costco.
5. In Philadelphia, 11 people wee threatened with up to 47 years in prison each for quietly demonstrating at a public gay pride parade while being hounded and yelled at by the "gay angels." Yet gay activists from Soulforce Albuquerque, disrupted a peaceful meeting of  "Courage" (a group of gay Catholics who meet together to follow Church teachings of sexuality) in a Catholic Church, with absolutely no consequences. These double standards are common.
6. The Press gallery of the Ontario Legislature gave a 20 year veteran member of the press club, who was a Christian, a notice of dismissal because he informed his colleagues of a pro-life story.
7. Uffe Elbaek, a gay politician from Denmark was interviewed in the Canadian gay paper Capital Xtra. Here is an excerpt of the article:

   "[there was] a problem with a private Christian school that refused to include gay studies. 'City council had to step in and lay down the law. Even if you are a private school, you must promote tolerance.'"(Capital Xtra! Dec 1, 2005, pg 15)

They legally forced Christians to go against their beliefs. I'm having trouble distinguishing this from the Communist KGB when they tried to wipe Christianity out of Poland. Here are Christian business people who no longer have the human right to work without compromising their values. In the Netherlands Christian ministers have been dragged to court. Proposed strategies to strong arm the North American Churches this way are all over the gay press. Does anyone doubt that priests will be dragged to court for refusing to marry gay couples? The tiny provision protecting religions has already been wiped away in Canada by the Human Rights Tribunal in the cases cited above. Yet, even with this clear abuse of human rights legislature, the gay friendly mainstream press continues to portray Christians as victimizers rather than those being victimized.

In a ruling on a private school's position that gay sex is wrong, the Ontario Human Rights Commission posted this statement on their website:

The proper place to draw the line is generally between belief and conduct. The freedom to hold beliefs is broader than the freedom to act on them. So long as a discriminatory belief is not translated into at discriminatory behavior, individuals and institutions have the right to uphold those beliefs. (Published in Capital Xtra gay newspaper Feb 22, 2007)

The former head of the Ontario Human Rights Commission, Keith Norton, held a press conference where he said he was "deeply troubled by the lack of any regulatory requirement for private schools to comply with the provincial human rights code." This is the history of the human rights commission. It is an anti-Christian institution and it is regulating the way that people in Canada live their lives. Teaching your child the Bible is now being seriously considered a discriminatory behaviour and so the experience in the Netherlands is coming to Canada. This is a modern day inquisition against anyone who does not hold with the state religion which is fundamentalist humanism. Secular fundamentalism simultaneously belittles religion, and sets forth its own religious dogmas. The gay newspaper Capital Xtra said:

"We're working to remake the world in our image."
Gareth Kirkby, Capital Xtra, Aug. 16, 2007

For a list of political agenda items, written by the gay community go here. There is a huge buzz in the gay papers now about "charitable status." Now that gay marriage is legal in Canada most religions are at odds with the government. That means their charitable status is in jeopardy. Here is an excerpt from the Ottawa Citizen June 12, 2005.

Churches that oppose same-sex marriage legislation have good reason to fear for their charitable status, a leading gay-rights advocate is warning..."If you are at the public trough, if you are collecting taxpayers' money, you should be following taxpayers' laws. And that means adhering to the Charter," says Kevin Bourassa, who in 2001 married Joe Varnell in one of Canada's first gay weddings..."We have no problem with the Catholic Church or any other faith group promoting bigotry," he said. "We have a problem with the Canadian government funding that bigotry."

There is no such thing as absolute human rights. When human rights legislation is turned into a fundamentalist philosophy there are only displaced human rights. There are always winners and losers. One group's human rights becomes another group's "oppression."

"I would ban religion completely ... It turns people into really hateful lemmings ..."
(Elton John, quoted on CNN, Nov. 2006)

Hauntingly, Elton John is revealing the logical outcome of secular fundamentalism. He would throw us in jail for assembling in public, for not believing his dogma that every form of human sexuality is wholesome. I'm having trouble understanding the difference between Elton John's position and that of communist China or even ancient Rome for that matter. It's ultimate outcome is to throw Christians in jail, or worse.

Our culture presents Human Rights as some kind of universal truth. Louise Arbour, the famous feminist Canadian lawyer, who is now the High Commissioner of Human Rights, at the United Nations said:

I believe we cannot just export the universality model pretending it doesn't contain a point of view. It's a western point of view, we nourished, cultivated it. It's our baby, our product. We purport to say its neutral but nothing is neutral. (Louise Arbour, Chatelaine Magazine, Feb, 2007.)

Canada goes down the road of Human Secularism

I'm a Canadian guy so I will talk a bit about the situation here. It is a warning to other countries. There is currently an anti Christian bias in the Canadian Government. Christian lobby groups receive no Government funding whatsoever and Churches lose their charitable status if they lobby. On the other hand, EGALE (Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere) which has fueled the gay marriage bill, has received generous donations from Canadian Government organizations like the Court Challenges Program, Ontario Trillium Foundation, Heritage Canada, and the National Film Board of Canada.

The Government is giving the gay community money to lobby the Government to change the laws.

This is an example of the current anti-Christian double standard in Canada. And the mere mention that there is discrimination against Christians unleashes a tirade of criticism from the gay friendly press. The Liberal Government of Canada got into power by saying they would restore democracy into the House of Commons. Three months later Prime Minister Martin forced his cabinet to vote with him on gay marriage or lose their positions. The vote (Bill C-38) passed and Gay Marriage is now legal in Canada. The Canadian gay paper said:

"[Gay Marriage] Bill C-38 would have likely been defeated if Paul Martin allowed his Liberal cabinet to vote their conscience." (Capital Xtra! Dec 1, 2005, pg 7).

The Gay community is proud that "equal marriage" passed in Canada even though it completely trampled over democracy in parliament, and even though it compromised the human rights of Liberal cabinet ministers to do so. It appears the gay community is not really interested in human rights as an ideal. I suggest that the rhetoric of human rights is simply a vehicle that it is using to spread its agenda.

Allowing the gay community to enshrine into law, values which go against the history of our society, does affect others in this society. Relativism and secular fundamentalism are built on a false premises. What you do does affect me and what's true for you does affect me, and vice versa. John Lennon said, "I am he as you are he, as you are me and we are all together." We Christians and the gay community are going to have to work this thing out because we are in this world together, whether we like it or not.

Sex and society in general

Since Freud, we in modern society have become increasingly sex centred. Today, society considers the Catholic Church's views on sex "regressive, old fashioned and medieval". But "modern society" is more "regressive" than the Church. It is following Caligula in ancient Rome.

Perhaps the Church is Medieval, but if that is so, then modern society is Primal!

A couple of years ago the #1 dance song hit was:

You and me baby, we ain't nothing but mammals
So let's do it like they do on the Discovery channel

Never before in history has mankind been so sex-centred. Internet porn (the "crack cocaine" of sex addiction), late night TV, and even sex on prime time TV are just a few ways that society pushes pornography right into our homes. Viagra is a top selling drug. Men can't keep up with the amount of sex they think they should have. My email inbox is full of the same kind of male enhancement spam as everyone else. In 2001, the National Post reported that 25% of girls in the age bracket 15-25 have venereal warts. It has become common for 12-13 year old girls to show up at high schools to give group oral sex to male high school athletes. Statistics Canada reports 100,000 abortions a year (over 1,000,000 in the US).

Even with devastating statistics, modern culture thinks everybody has to have unbridled sex. Teenage girls who refuse to kiss another girl at parties are ostracized by the boys. People who don't have sex are viewed with pity or contempt. We wonder what is wrong with them. Psychiatrists have a field day with people who feel called to celibacy. Teenagers who want to wait until marriage are ridiculed by their peers.

Gender as a Mr. Potato Head game

It is clear that there is a difference between genders. They are complementary.

Many advocates of same sex marriage think of gender as a sort of "Mr. Potato Head" game where the core of all people is the same and only the body parts are different.

I believe this is wrong and that men and women are different to the core. I think any psychologist will confirm this as will the author of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus. I think kids need a mom and a dad. The Government of France, which is one of the most liberal in the world, did an exhaustive secular study and determined gay marriage is bad for kids. More about this below.

STD, Suicide and other Statistics in the Gay Community

Some Gay activists say that the high levels of promiscuity and related STD's, partner abuse, addiction, and suicide in the gay community are because gay men have delayed adolescence as a result of "coming out" late (i.e., in there 30's), and they are promiscuous because they were late blooming teenagers. They say things like "Does your gay age match your chronological age?"  If that theory was true then the statistics would show the promiscuity of adult gay men to be similar to straight teenagers. But that is just not so. Adult gay men have promiscuity statistics far exceeding straight teenagers. The other problem with this theory is that there is no indication that the "adolescent sex craze" period in gay men slows down after 5 years of coming out as it does after adolescents finish their teen years. In most cases the addiction to lust increases over time. Articles in gay papers ridicule gay men who don't want exposure to HIV encouraging them to not curb sex.

If you live downtown and you go to gay spaces and you hook up, then you definitely know and are having sex with HIV-positive guys ...you're entitled to not use condoms, to not ask when you partner was last tested, to smoke tina and party hard - but know that those choices belong to you not your partner. (Capital Xtra June 7, 2007)

The culture of pushing sex down peoples throats is not working. There is nothing wrong with abstinence from sex. HIV positive or not. It goes for everyone who is not married to someone of the opposite sex. I've been single and chaste for many years. You don't die from not having sex. My experience in the gay community is here.

Recent laws and policies aimed at reducing the rate of suicide, addiction, partner abuse, and STD's etc by granting more sexual freedom have not diminished those statistics. There has been an increase since the beginning of the 'rights' movement in the early 70's and its getting worse, not better. Some statistics can be found from the following gay web sites: http://www.gaytoz.com/bResearch.asp  and http://www.mens-survey.ca . Health Canada has a very disturbing study about the prevalence of HIV here.

In places like San Francisco and the Netherlands where its cool to be gay, a lot of these stats are worse, so I have difficulty with the theory that more freedom will reduce these stats. That is just not where the facts point.

Gay rights activists simultaneously want to legalize sexual promiscuity in bathhouses and sexual fidelity of marriage

Laws currently under attack by gay lobbyists include those that forbid public nudity, public sex (i.e., public washrooms and parks), group sex (i.e., bathhouses), and importation of pornography. (Capital Xtra, Apr 11,2005) As well they are fighting to legitimize the "sex trade" (male and female prostitution), and lowering the age of consent for anal sex to include 14 year old boys and girls. They are lobbying the school boards for sex education programs aimed at 11 year old girls and boys that include graphic images of how to perform anal and oral sex.

I have trouble reconciling this simultaneous lobby for "sexual fidelity" in a "marriage" while they push for bathhouses, legalization of anal sex with 14 year olds, etc... I'm sorry but these issues are not "Human Rights," these are "Human Wrongs!"

The genesis of the modern "human rights" movement is based on Christian theological principles

Sexual fidelity is the answer, not "sexual freedom"

I don't believe the answer to our problems is more freedom. I believe the solution lies in a personal relationship with Jesus. At Lourdes, France on Aug 15, 2004 the Pope said:

... Be men and women of freedom! But remember: human freedom is a freedom wounded by sin. It is a freedom which itself needs to be set free. Christ is its liberator.

All humans have sexuality. It's God's gift, but with any gift comes a great responsibility. Sex is powerful. People are born from sex, people die from sex (STD's). If I get a powerful gift for Christmas, say a car, there are rules that keep me safe. I think it is the same with sexuality. 

For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. For you were called to freedom, brothers and sisters, only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for self-indulgence ... (Gal 5:1, 13-18)

Here are some Catholic definitions: Chastity:  No sex outside of marriage, sex is perfectly acceptable in the context of a marriage blessed by the Church. Marriage: An unbreakable lifelong union between one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others. Celibacy: Abstinence from sex, and usually implies remaining single.

The Catholic Church has always asserted that chastity, or alternatively celibacy, are the correct expressions of our sexual natures. This is supported by the Bible. It applies to everyone, including Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals and Transgendered (GLBT) people. I know that would get me laughed out of a university class on human behavior and unfortunately out of many psychiatrist's offices.

How does the Church explain same sex attraction ? 

It would be impossible to understand the Catholic Church's position on gay marriage without exploring its take on same sex attraction in general.

I don't have a solution to same sex attraction. The Catholic Church is the first to admit that it is a mystery. The Church is not saying same sex attraction is a choice. The Catechism says:

". . .It's psychological genesis remains largely unexplained." (section 2357)

Psychiatrists can't explain same sex attraction. But that doesn't mean gay "love" sex is right. It just means it's unexplained. There are many disabilities that modern medicine has not unraveled. Before "Stonewall" in 1969 ¹, there were huge arguments within the gay community itself about whether homosexuality is a disability. The gay community was divided within itself. After much lobbying by the gay community, including the storming of a 1972 San Francisco psychiatric convention, the Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from the DSM (catalogue of disabilities) in 1973. Just because they caved into pressure and changed their position does not mean they are right. Sometimes psychiatrists are wrong, individually and collectively. (i.e., they have among the highest divorce and suicide rates)³ Now under the emerging Bill C250 in Canada, any attempt to link same sex attraction with disability can cause the threat of "hate crime." Five thousand years of civilization overturned in 30 years.

The Catechism says:

Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity (Gen 19:1-29; Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10), tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity.

The Catechism goes on to say:

...The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection. (Catechism 2357-2359).

There is nothing shameful about a disability. Most human beings have some sort of disability. The big question is what are we going to do about it? What we "feel" is not a choice, what we do about it is a choice. I chose chastity.

I have received several angry emails from people in their early 20's who are completely shocked at the mention of same sex attraction and disability in the same phrase. Our generation is not old enough to remember the battles that went on about it. Every generation likes to think it is the most enlightened group to hit the face of the planet.

I was the same way when I was pushing for political "equality" for the gay community, which I did on Canadian National TV when I congratulated gay MP Svend Robinson for "coming out." He has since tried to have references to "God" removed from the Canadian constitution and wants to see the Bible outlawed as "hate" literature. He has succeeded in passing a law that punishes people for merely publicly disagreeing with gay sex. The bill constitutes this as a hate crime in Canada under his new law Bill C250. Oh Lord forgive him! And forgive me for having supported him.

I got an email that said:

[for the Church] to treat gay persons as they have been treated is immoral. It is shameful and I detest that treatment. I long ago left such an abusive relationship.

I don't think the Catholic Church's current attitude is abusive, I think it is love. A loving parent sometimes has to tell a child not to play in a bad neighbourhood. The child may take offense and tell all his friends how mean his parents are. Perhaps the child goes to school and tells the teachers and principal that his parents are abusive (the way the Gay community is going to politicians about the "hateful" church). Perhaps the child goes to the Children's Aid and files a report against the parents (the way the gay community runs to the Human Right's Commission). The parent sadly accepts this anger, judgment, and threatening calls from teachers, principals and perhaps the Children's Aid. But nevertheless, the parent has to stand firm because the parent loves the child and wants to protect the child from the dangers of the bad neighbourhood. Sometimes being a good parent means being hated by children who make unsafe demands.

Like the child in the example above, some people in the gay community think the Catholic Church has been unfair with its position on gay sex and have complained loudly and publicly. The Church has been beat up badly by the press, politicians, and by the courts. Like the parent in the example above, the Catholic Church must stand firm and accept the pain and damage of this bad press in order to protect the souls of Christians who obey and listen to the Church's teaching. It is precisely because the Catholic Church loves gay people (and all people) that it advises against gay sex. Other denominations have caved into the pressure to be more "progressive", but it has not helped grow their churches and they are currently on the brink of extinction.

Interpretations of the Bible that attempt to justify gay "love"

I am grateful that some people in the gay community are still reading the Bible and looking for answers to the moral dilemmas of modern man in Sacred Scripture. Please continue, the Bible is the most happening book on the planet. I have moved my section on gay sex in the Bible out of this document to its own page because it got quite detailed in response to many emails from the gay community. It is here. I'll just touch on a few points here.

The Bible covers a 5000 year period from the dawn of man to the years after Christ's resurrection. From back to front, it never flinches on its strong opposition to gay sex. That in itself is a powerful statement in the wake of the statistically documented devastation that has occurred in the short 30 years since gay sex has been "accepted" by western society.

Isn't the Bible and God about "love" so doesn't that make gay love (sex) cool?

There are four Greek words for love in the Bible. I suggest the gay community is confusing same sex phila (brotherly love) which the Bible encourages, with same sex "eros" (romantic love) which the Bible condemns. More on this topic here

In the New Testament, doesn't Jesus wash away the Old Testament law and morality?

Gay sex is condemned in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. Also Jesus said:

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Mt 5:17) More on this topic here

Wasn't Sodom about "unwelcoming" rather than gay love (sex)?

Lots of towns were unwelcoming, they didn't share the same fate of Sodom. The New Testament says "Likewise Sodom and Gomorrah in the same manner...indulged in sexual immorality and... unnatural lust." (Jude 1:7) This is pretty clear about what went wrong in Sodom. More on this topic here

Wasn't Sodom about "rape" rather than about same sex committed relationships?

No one was raped that night in Sodom. The Angels blinded them so they could not even find the door to get in to Lot's house to do the rape (Gen 19:11). More on this topic here

Well then, wasn't Sodom about "intended rape," that is almost as bad as rape?

Peter describes Sodom's sin as 'licentious, lawless deeds.' (2 Peter 2:7) The word 'lawless' is particularly interesting because Jewish law found in Leviticus never specified the 'intent' of rape as a crime. However, gay sex is expressly forbidden in Jewish law. (Lev 18:22) Peter uses the word 'deeds' to describe Sodom's sin. This infers a concrete action, not just intent. This passage says "indulge their flesh in depraved lust." To indulge the flesh points to more than intent to rape. The passage says Lot was tormented 'day after day' by lawless deeds he 'saw and heard.' This appears to be more than simple intent and appears to refer to more than one isolated incident. I think Jer 23:14 and Isaiah 3:9 also support this. More on this topic here

Isn't Romans 1:24-27 simply saying that people should not have gay sex if it is "unnatural" for them?

So lets for a moment consider that to be true, that the passage exempts 100% purebred homosexuals (on the Kinsey scale, if there is such a thing). Where would that leave the bisexual? Virtually all theologians and gay friendly churches that justify gay sex using this defense also defend the validity of a bisexual orientation, which their interpretation of this passage damns. If they don't take their own theology seriously, why should I?  I don't think "degrading their bodies among themselves" is something from which "purebred 100% homosexuals" are exempt. "Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error." This passage describes acts not intentions. If an action is condemned, it does not matter who does it, whether the person is straight, gay, bi, transgendered or whatever. More on this topic here

Doesn't the Bible have examples of same sex relations such as Saul and Jonathan, Naomi and Ruth, Paul and Timothy, and even Jesus and John?

There is no reasonable evidence in Scripture that these relationships are anything other than Phila (Greek for brotherly love). I suggest those who advance the theory of gay sex between holy people in the Bible are mistaking Phila for Eros (romantic love). Surely, people in the gay community can imagine close same sex friendships without sex.

Regardless of these attempts to redefine Scripture, there is just no way around the explicit passages in the Bible that forbid gay sex (love). (Gen 19:1-29; Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10, Jud 1:7) Scripture condemns gay sex. Scripture says that Jesus was without sin. (Heb 4:15) So no, Jesus was not into gay sex with John. Some people in the gay community can't get their heads around the idea that someone can live a happy productive life and be celibate.

This theory about gay lovers in the Bible is basically saying that the Scripture contradicts itself, by simultaneously condemning and condoning gay love (sex). This reduces the Bible to an archaic peace of historical literature. If that is the case, then there is no need to try to find a justification for gay sex in Scripture because, as an outdated piece of history, it would not hold humanity to a moral standard. However, the Bible itself says it is the Word of God and that we should not mess with it. (Rev 22:18)

How can Christians judge gay sex when the Bible says "Judge not, that you be not judged"
(Mat 7:1-2)?

This is often used to try to silence those who publicly oppose sin. The passage is condemning hypocrisy, it is not condemning those who publicly denounce sin for what it is. Two verses later, Jesus says, "...first take the log out of your own eye, then you will clearly be able to take the speck out of your neighbours eye."  I have taken the log of sexual immorality out of my eye and I have been following the teachings of the Church on sexuality and I invite you to do the same. It is a great life. There are plenty of Bible verses that show us that it is very important to publicly oppose sin. (Jn 7:14, Lk, 12:57, Psm 37:30, Prv 31:9, Lk 17:3, Lev 19:15-17, Is 22:2, 23:36, Mat 23, Mat 3: 2,7, Acts 13:10, Cor 2:15, 6:2-3, Jn 3:18-19, 12:48).  Jesus said, "Stop judging by mere appearances, and make a right judgment" (Jn 7:24). Christianity has always been called to impact and influence society toward God's vision as it is laid out in Scripture.

Jesus is most certainly about love. He loves everybody in the GLBT community every bit as much as he does every person sitting in Church. He loves each of us equally and that is 100%.

Jesus loves us just the way we are -
and he loves us too much to leave us that way!

I think anyone who is a parent can understand this idea.

Love does not always say "Yes"

The Gay Community as a whole has abandoned the Bible

The gay community, as a whole, has abandoned attempts to find a justification for gay "love" in the Bible, and they are settling instead with the theory that the Bible is an outdated historical document coloured by its cultural context. Given that Jesus and the apostles flew in the face of the culture of their time, to the point of death, there is no reason to believe they "caved into" social norms on homosexuality. The apostles said gay sex is wrong, (and that doesn't mean it is worse than other sexual sin).

Many in the gay community want to ban the Bible as "hate literature." This crowd also tends to be against censorship and want the Government of Canada to stop interfering with the importation of violent sex pornography. I find this paradox counter-intuitive.

I believe the Bible is not what the gay community is say it is. It is not about hate. Quite the opposite, the Bible is about God's love (Agape) for humanity and practical ways to experience that love. The Bible leads to an eternity of love with our Creator. Please, I ask you to spend time with Jesus. He loves you and wants to help. He has helped me immensely.

"God made me gay, it is cruel for him to ask me not to act it out!"

One of the most powerful lines in the movie "Brokeback Mountain" is when Jack Twist says to Ennis "God, I wish I knew how to quit you!" Then Ennis Del Mar says "Well, why don't you?" It was heartbreaking because we can see the genuine dilemma of a man who is "in Love" with another man. The movie leaves the question open ended, as if there is no answer. However, I believe the question does have an answer, a beautiful and powerful answer. Unfortunately, Jack was not serious when he said the word "God."

Quitting anything that we are powerfully addicted to is incredibly hard. How many times have alcoholics looked at a bottle and said "God, I wish I knew how to quite you." How many times have smokers looked at a pack of cigarettes and said "God, I wish I knew how to quite you."

There have been studies to which some in the gay community have pointed to "prove" people are born gay. (i.e., "INAH-3" by Simon Levay, "Twins and Other Brothers" by Bailey & Pillar, "Xq28 Genetic Markers" by Dean Hamer). However, none of these researchers has claimed "proof" of the born gay theory. Reputable researchers admit there are many problems with these studies such as small samples sizes and inconsistent results. What these studies have shown, however, is that some people who should have been gay based on the theory, were not gay. So people's sexuality is not dictated by the conditions laid out in the studies. Probably there are multiple contributing factors. We just don't know - nobody does.

[my personal opinion is that some people are born with a "predisposition" to homosexuality, just like some are born with a predisposition to alcoholism or depression. In other words a combination of environmental and emotional circumstances may interact with certain predispositions resulting in what we might call "gay". I think that is quite a bit different from being born gay as an immutable characteristic such as race or colour. Some people who are born with a predisposition to depression become depressed, some don't. Some become depressed but after tuning their life over to Jesus, experience amazing healing and freedom from depression. I think this predisposition to any difficulty is a result of "original sin". Again this is just my opinion and I am in no way speaking for the Church here.]

Some people who are attracted to the same sex think that the mere fact that they feel that way means they should act on it. But just because a human feels a certain way doesn't mean we are condemned to act on it. For example, there are studies that say all men are hard wired to have multiple partners. But most of us would agree that it is not appropriate for men to live that out. Most well adjusted and happy men don't. Not all things that feel good are truly good for us.

It was fun for me to do drugs, but God was calling me to a higher way of living. We live in a broken world. Catholics call it "original sin."

Jesus freed the woman who was going to be stoned for adultery, "Neither do I condemn you", but he also said "from now on do not sin again" (Jn 8:11). Jesus loves us completely. He calls us to a higher standard, and sometimes that feels uncomfortable.

Jesus wants all of us to live outside our comfort zone.

Abstaining from gay sex may seem uncomfortable, for a time, but it gets easier. For example, if I don't exercise for a long time. The first time I run, it will be painful, it will feel and unnatural. But in time, my body gets used to this healthier way of living. I may say to my personal trainer "you are cruel, how could you expect so much from me?". The personal trainer would say "It's because I want you to be healthy, and I know you are capable of this. It may be painful now, but it will bring much fruit in the future." This is what the Church is saying to the same sex attracted person.

Love does not always say "Yes"

I'm not saying same sex attraction is that simple. I am simply saying that it is possible to be free, thousands are. If you are struggling, you can be free also. I am praying for you. There is freedom in Christ. I don't know what form of freedom that will take for you. My experience in the gay community is here.

I have not been in any relationships for many years. I feel the Lord has called me to be single for Him. I follow the Church teaching on sexuality. I have not died yet, nor has my mind turned into a shriveled mushroom from not having sex. I'm happy, very healthy, and well adjusted. My song writing is better than ever, much better than the days when I was performing on Broadway. I have the most awesome meditations where I can just feel the Lord moving through my whole system. Its a beautiful life. The Psychiatrists are wrong about human sexuality. Sex is optional, honest. You don't die from not having sex. Its not like food and water. All humans have some sort of sexual struggle. We'd hardly be human if we didn't. The question is "what are we going to do about it?" God can answer that question. We live in a broken world. Paul comfortingly reminds us:

No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it. (1 Cor. 10:13).

In a society that is sex-centred it's hard to imagine that I am much more than my sexual attractions. I don't think we are defined by who we are attracted to. We are spiritual beings living in a material world. This world is only the "Matrix." Come join "The Resistance."

In the movie Brokeback Mountain
Jack Twist: [looks over at Ennis in the firelight; he has laid back and is looking up at the stars, smiling] Anything interesting up there in heaven?
Ennis Del Mar: [for the first time in a long time, content] I was just sending up a prayer of thanks.
Jack Twist: For what?
Ennis Del Mar: [with a wink and a smile] For you forgettin' to bring that harmonica. I'm enjoyin' the peace and quiet.

The Lord is real, and he is ready to help those who honestly ask for help. Unfortunately Ennis didn't take the next step and pursue that Spiritual moment. He made a joke out of it so he didn't have to look at the truth about the knock on his heart as he looked at the stars.

Sources of help for Gay People

The Catholic organization "Courage",help GLBT people who want to explore their relationship with Christ and who want to come into alignment with his will around sex.  Sexaholics Anonymous has been successful at helping people maintain a chaste lifestyle in accordance with biblical teachings.  Other sites include:

Zacchaeus
Exodus (organized by Evangelicals)
www.newdirection.ca
www.freetobeme.com
www.ewm.org

You can also start your own group. Approach you priest or pastor and ask him for some space on a weeknight. I bet you will get it. I invision a world where Churches are actively seeking to help people with same sex attraction, to stay chaste.

God heals our sexuality in many different ways. He has a plan for each person. Perhaps some people will remain celibate, others will feel called to marriage with a person of the opposite sex. Many have had successful straight marriages and have had kids. Some will struggle with same sex attraction for their lifetime and will need much support to remain sexually chaste. Others will be completely freed. There is no prescription. But the common thread is that those who turn to the Lord get an amazing amount of support and freedom. Jesus really does heal. The closer we get to him, the more freedom we experience.

Why are Catholics against gay marriages?

I was silent on gay issues for 18 years after I became a Christian. I left the entertainment world and stopped speaking out for the gay community and I never thought I would speak out against it. But now I can no longer in good conscience stay quiet because the tables have turned and the oppression is against Christians and against free speech. I think we have turned the Human Rights code into a fundamentalist religion.

Our culture presents Human Rights as some kind of universal truth. Louise Arbour, the famous feminist Canadian lawyer, who is now the High Commissioner of Human Rights, at the United Nations said:

I believe we cannot just export the universality model pretending it doesn't contain a point of view. It's a western point of view, we nourished, cultivated it. It's our baby, our product. We purport to say its neutral but nothing is neutral. (Louise Arbour, Chatelaine Magazine, Feb, 2007.)

I'll speak about something that many people find offensive - God. Catholics believe that God is real, and we think he has an opinion about all kinds of things, including our sexual stuff. We think the laws of God's universe are more binding than the laws of man. Natural law does not change just because man says so.

We could pass a law that gravity is not binding on all humans.
But if I jump off a cliff that law will not do me much good.

Making a law that allows gay marriage will not change the truth about marriage. It is just a kind of collective denial. Re-defining marriage is example of what our culture is doing in other areas. We humans are trying to force God to change the rules that govern life, love and death. A big issue in the courts now is whether we can patent the creation of a living organism. Another issue is that we are growing little humans and dissecting them after we create them, all in the name of progress (stem cells). In the midst of our arrogance, I think our whole society is in danger of facing the same kind of fate as "Dolly" ¹² The cloned sheep who was heralded as a miraculous scientific breakthrough in the press - then she died, which we didn't read much about.

We don't read much about the statistics of what is going on in gay community in the press either. But those who examine the them will see that the Bible and the statistics agree. Truth is truth and it does not bend itself to the whims of man.

I have a blind friend who loves to jog. He was jogging across the street one morning. He didn't believe a car was coming. That was his "truth," and he believed it. Unfortunately, he was wrong. A car hit him and broke his leg.

This is a true story, I met this man. If I was on the side of the road I hope I would not have been "tolerant of his truth". That that is the same reason that I am writing this article.

The Bible is warns us against gay sex and it invites us to understand the beauty and depth of hetero marriage. And for those who are not called to hetero marriage it invites us into a relationship with God. A Catholic would have to reduce the Bible to a bit of outdated history in order to justify gay marriage. To people who think the Bible is outdated, I suggest more prayer and less TV. 

Many people in secular society are in favour of gay marriage and have trouble understanding why faithful Catholics are against it. Yet, fifteen years ago, these same people would say gay marriage is wrong. Now they think that the Church is very intolerant. Something has changed, either society has become "enlightened" about gay marriage or it has become complacent about the concept of marriage. The Catholic Church feels it is the latter.

Hetero marriage is screwed up, so why not have homo marriage?

In recent years, the institution of marriage has gone through a metamorphosis. Divorces are at an all time high, and the percentage of extra-marital affairs is skyrocketing. Faithful marriages that practice fidelity are scarce these days. Against this backdrop we can see why most Canadians aren't too concerned about the definition of marriage.

But even with the recent breakdown of hetero marriages, hetero relationships last much longer than gay relationships. In the Netherlands, the most gay-friendly country in the world, gay men have a very difficult time honouring the ideal of marriage, even though it is legal there. A British medical journal reports that gay relationships last, on average, 1.5 years and gay men have an average of eight partners a year outside of their supposedly "committed" relationships. Contrast that with 41% of first hetero marriages in Canada end before their 15th anniversary, and 1 in 10 Canadians have an extra marital affair. Now I'm going to say something that people say is extremely intolerant, but is a statistical fact. Today, the average life span of sexually active gay men is 38 years old. ⁴ I think abstinence is much safer, and healthier. And that is the life I have chosen.

I think the high incidence of infidelity, especially sex with total strangers, points to fundamental flaws in the theory that couples of the same sex, have the same potential to be satisfied in their relationships as straight people. From my experience with the gay community, the idea of "fidelity" is relative. What it really means is "mostly monogamous." If gay men and lesbians are satisfied in their relationships then it would stand to reason that marriage in the Netherlands would be a more successful institution there. But gay couples are flocking to divorce courts as quickly as they are running to marriage ceremonies. It is a total failure. There are no indications that it will be any different here in North America.

The gay community is not a healthy place. That is what my experience around the gay community, around gay rights movement, as a professional performer on Broadway, and the statistics themselves tell me. It is not a healthy place for adults, nor do I think it will be a healthy place for children. Studies show that children of Lesbian couples show much higher rates of cross gender sex, promiscuity, and confusion.

Some may say "yeah but there are tons of broken homes in the straight community so who are you to judge?" I don't think it is right to point at the worst examples of straight marriage and use that as a jumping off place for the discussion of gay marriage. Instead of trying to further soil the institution of marriage, I think we should be reviving it. We should be reviving the idea of lifelong commitment and chastity before marriage. An upcoming reality TV show in Canada will be about gay marriage. The Globe and Mail had picture of men in drag with a big sash doing a real campy mockery of marriage. It was making fun of the sacrament of marriage.

I recently had an exchange with an equity lawyer who was in favour of gay marriage. He said "no one pays much attention to marriage these days so why worry about keeping the definition." I replied that there are many faithful Christians who still value marriage so why not leave the definition of marriage for those to whom it still means something.

Evangelicals and Catholics are strongly aligned on this issue. There were ecumenical demonstrations of 6000 people on Parliament Hill on Aug 22, 2003 and 15,000 people in April 9, 2005. I pray that the Lord will guide you in understanding his ways that He has chosen to reveal through his Holy Word.

Gender as a Mr. Potato Head game

It is clear that there is a difference between genders. They are complementary.

Many advocates of same sex marriage think of gender as a sort of "Mr. Potato Head" game where the core of all people is the same and only the body parts are different.

I believe this is wrong and that men and women are different to the core. I think any psychologist will confirm this as will the author of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus. I think kids need a mom and a dad. Bishop Henry said:

Two individuals of the same sex, regardless of their race, wealth, stature, erudition or fame, will never be able to marry because of an insurmountable biological impossibility. The denial of the social and legal status of marriage to same-sex couples is not discrimination. It is not something opposed to justice; on the contrary, justice requires such an opposition. The committed union of two people of the same sex is not the same human reality as the committed union of one man and one woman. A same-sex union is not a physical union that transmits human life, producing children. A same-sex union is not the joining of two complementary natures that complete each other. Simply stated, a same sex union is not marriage. The idea that homosexuals can create same sex "marriage" through their individual choice is false. All the packaging in the world doesn't alter substance. F. B. Henry, Bishop of Calgary

The effect on children and families

The gay marriage agenda is not only targeted at adults in society but children also. There is an agenda to teach our children that gay marriage is ok. In some areas children who bring their parent's Christian beliefs about marriage into school are being disciplined. And gay marriage is not even legal yet.  It is no wonder that more and more Christian families are turning to home schooling.

France is the one of the most liberal countries in the world. Yet after an exhaustive secular study it determined that gay marriage would be bad for children and so did not make it legal.

A friend of mine's daughter went to England to visit. While there she stayed with a lesbian couple who were friends with the mother. Although the daughter had always dated boys, she came back saying, maybe I'll fall in love with a woman, would that be OK mom? I can't say whether the 16 year old is latent lesbian or not, but I think it is clear that kids that age are very mixed up about their sexuality. Their bodies are changing at an amazing rate and they are confused about a lot of things.

On CBC radio I heard an interview with a lesbian lawyer who told her daughter, "If you come home and say you want to get married, I will be very upset." (CBC "The Current", Dec., 2004) I heard a different interview on the radio with a 13 year old girl whose parents are a lesbian couple. This girl is totally attracted to boys but when asked point blank if she was straight she said "I think so, but I'm not sure." (CHRI summer 2004) Having been someone who has crossed gender boundaries I can say it is very easy to fall into the culture of our surroundings. Handing the gay community marriage and then handing them kids will have a very confusing effect on these children. Human sexuality is a mess.

... Be men and women of freedom! But remember: human freedom is a freedom wounded by sin. It is a freedom which itself needs to be set free. Christ is its liberator. (Pope JPII at Lourdes Aug, 2004)

The Media vs the Vatican

The media says the Vatican's position against same sex marriage is wrong. If we are going to refuse the authority of the Vatican, I would ask "who then has the authority"? The next place to look would be the Bible. The Bible has a clear definition of marriage (Mat 19:5, Mark 10:7, Eph 5:31). So that's a non-starter. Now we've thrown out the Vatican and the Bible so let's look for another source of authority in support of same sex marriage, perhaps historical precedent. There is none. Before this generation, never in history has it been legal in any civilized country to marry the same sex. The verdict of the ages is that marriage is for complementary sexes. Some advocates have suggested that same sex partnerships mimicked marriage in the middle ages but no scholarly historical research will turn up legally accepted same sex marriage from that period. So now we have to look somewhere else for the authority. Some have suggested that ancient Greece accepted homosexual partnerships, but that is not so. In ancient Greece, older gay men would "train" younger men for hetero marriage so they would be able to "perform" on their wedding night. In ancient Greece, there were some adult gay relationships but the adult passive partner was judged quite harshly by society. "Bottoms" were not cool in Greece. So we need to look elsewhere.

Occasionally, advocates have looked to nature for a precedent. Some scientists have found isolated incidents of homosexual partnerships in the animal kingdom. Advocates have used this research to claim human same sex partnerships are normal. I don't think the animal kingdom should be a moral compass for civilized human sexual behavior. Also, physical and psychological disabilities are as prevalent in the animal kingdom as they are among humans. So we have to look for another authority - perhaps biology. Secular biologists say that normal sexual partnerships are to make up what is lacking in the other partner - a complimentary. Let's look further, perhaps our governments. Our own governments have accepted the lobby of the gay community itself. So we are back full circle. The gay community itself has decided this is what is right. They invented it out of thin air.

Some have said that regardless of religion, God himself sanctifies gay marriage, because he is "Love" and all relationships are about love - even gay ones. Earlier I mentioned the four Greek words for Love. Although Jesus is all for "Philia" (brotherly love) between people of the same sex, I would challenge anyone to find one case in the Bible of Jesus (or any apostle) advocating "Eros" (romantic love) between people of the same sex. In fact the New Testament is very clearly against same sex "Eros" (Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10) and its consequences are described in Jude 1:6.

Should judges create new laws?

I got an email that said:

In fact, not only do I believe that is the right of the states and their judges to rule on this issue, but I feel that if anything, there should be an amendment that defines marriage as inclusive to all people regardless or sexual orientation.

It is the judge's job to interpret law not to redefine it. But the judges are now creating new laws, and they are far exceeding their jurisdiction which is simply to interpret existing laws. It is the Government's job to make laws. It's the judges job to interpret them. Judges have consistently overstepped their roles as interpreters of the law. In Canada,the legal system has become twisted. The Government appointed liberal judges who had a history of ruling in favour of same sex issues. Then it deferred to them, and asked them if it was constitutional to the government to change the definition of marriage. Now our laws around marriage are about as flawed as our laws about greenhouse gases and global warming.

Was marriage simply a legal convenience introduced in medieval times?

Some advocates for same sex marriage say "civil" marriage was introduced in medieval times simply as a way to divide up property and that it had nothing to do with Church. The history of "civil" marriage is more complex than that and a full exploration of it is beyond the scope of this simple paper. However, it was intimately related to the Church and the teaching of Christ. Jesus talked about marriage as based on love, not a social legal arrangement. That was 2000 years ago. That kind of shoots down the theory that "love" in marriage is only recent.

Official civil unions were introduced in the colonial period and they included prayers. The Council of Trent officially instituted marriage as a Sacrament in the 1500's but Jesus instituted marriage himself 15 centuries earlier and Christians in the Church followed it from that time forward (Mat 19:5, Mark 10:7). Catholics believe marriage is a religious concept designed by God before any government existed, before any law of man had been written. Marriage is God's idea. Catholics believe it is not for us as humans to tamper with. The word "Marriage" appears all over the New Testament (Mat 22:30, 24:38, Mk 12:25, Lk 2:36, 17:27, 20:34-35, 1 Co 7:38, 2 Co 11:2, 1 Ti 4:3, Heb 13:4, Rev 19:7, 19:9) and it is clearly drawn out as a relationship between one man and one woman. We cannot get around that without throwing out the Bible as "hate" literature, which is exactly what gay M.P. Svend Robinson wants to do. "God forgive him. He knows not what he is doing." (Lk 23:34)

Why are Christians worried? Doesn't the same sex "hate" law have an escape clause for people of religion?

The Canadian law for same sex marriage includes a clause to exempt religions from its adherence. This is a concession that MP Svend Robinson felt is not justified. We need only look at recent history to see that it will soon be challenged in courts. The Supreme Court has not exactly been "Christian friendly" lately. Members of the gay community have already threatened to take priests to court for refusing to honour their "unions." Blaine Marchand, a columnist with "Capital Xtra," says:

Yet for many "right thinking" religious people...they fear the legislation will reduce their sacred texts to hate literature. And so it should be ... Hasn't our nation's legislation on hate evolved over the past decades to include colour, race, religion, and ethnic origin? Why not sexuality?...Those opposed are expressing their fundamental religious fear of the human body. After all, if you take Christian mythology, the body is sinful and evil - thanks to Eve chowing down on that apple. (Capital Xtra, Oct 9, 2003)

Handing the gay community the religious word 'marriage' in the courts has put the religious community in a very precarious position. Priests, ministers, and rabbis will not be able to legally follow the moral laws upon which their religion is founded without the threat of being sued or thrown in jail. This does not sound to me like human rights. There have already been "hate" crime law suits against private Christian newspapers that refused to advertise gay events and against Church halls that refused gay events. The Christian owners of a bed and breakfast were fined  forced to close down their family business (unless they learn their lesson and allow gay men to have sex in their house), because they refused a gay couple a shared room. And as I mentioned above, Scott Brockie, incurred $200,000 in court fees simply because he refuses to print for the gay literature that it is against his religion. Now under Bill C250 in Canada, a Canadian who in good conscience speaks out against gay sex can be thrown in prison for 2 years. These do not sound like Human Rights, they are Human Wrongs.

Also, this clause does not cover those who oppose same sex marriage because of scientific or non-religious reasons. If they spoke out in public against same sex marriage for biological reasons they could be thrown in jail. So much for freedom of speech.

Isn't gay marriage like interracial marriage?

Some people think that banning gay marriage is just like banning interracial marriage. The difference is that affirming interracial marriages affirms the institution of marriage, allowing gay marriage redefines marriage. Others say "hey, my gay marriage won't affect your straight marriage." Catholics feel it will affect everybody, including married straight people. Public school students will be taught against the teachings of their parent's faith. Kids of gay marriages will influence the belief systems of Catholic kids. The concept of marriage would be weakened and vulnerable to another assault that Catholics cringe to think about - polygamy. This is already on the radar of many activists and I've read about it in several gay publications. It is simply not true that gay marriage doesn't affect others.

The government made the charter of rights and then says it is powerless to support it

Recently, Richard Mahoney, the Liberal candidate for Ottawa centre in Canada, came to my door looking for my vote in the federal election. After a quick prayer for wisdom I asked him where he stood on gay marriage. He said:

"it's a constitutional right granted under the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and it is not even in the political arena, it is a matter for the Supreme court to decide. They have the say in this ... not us."

I asked him "who wrote the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms?"

I could see him stumbling and thinking. After a couple of seconds he said "uh, uh, the people of Canada."

I said:

You mean the Government of Canada! The Government wrote the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, and now it is saying that the Supreme Court trumps Government authority on the issue of Gay Marriage because the Supreme Court has the Charter of Rights that was written by the Government of Canada ...Doesn't that sound kind of cyclical to you?"

He quietly dismissed himself and continued to pedal for votes among my neighbours...As he was leaving I invited him to pray about it and perhaps check out the lopsided demographics of the Canadian Human Rights Commission that is supposed to be representative of the Canadian public. The Liberals pushed through the marriage bill. Then they were voted out of power. I wonder why?

The Bible is the foundation of our justice system

The Bible has historically been the foundation of our entire justice system. Our entire moral code is based upon it. Before someone testifies in court they swear on a Holy Bible, (of course, that is now changing as we wonder why courts are so jammed up). Catholics believe the Bible is the Word of God. It is not an historical document of outdated opinions. An interpretation that rules against it is in a fundamental conflict with our social foundation. When the forefathers landed in America, the Bible was their vision for its culture. It is also the source of our conception of Human Rights. Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King, the pioneers of the Rights movement were fighting for something that was edified by the Bible, which is the foundation of our law. The gay community is fighting for something that is adamantly denounced by the Bible.The Bible is clear on the definition of marriage. (Mat 19:5, Mark 10:7, Eph 5:31). I pray that the gay community has a change of heart and turns to God for guidance on these issues. It's not too late.

No such thing as absolute truth

Today, we no longer talk about "absolute Truth." Everything is relative. So society talks about "Truth-s." In modern culture, one person's beliefs is as important as what someone else believes regardless of whether it is true or not. So modern society has abandoned truth, in favour of preference. This is one of the "gifts" that the "New Age" has given us. Society has determined that this is equality. We call it "tolerance." Society thinks this open view is progressive. However, I suggest this "New Age" approach to spirituality is quite old. The Old Testament is full of examples of God's people taking off and believing stuff similar to the "New Age." Eventually their own suffering brought them back to the Lord. I suggest that there is one Truth and it is not reliant on society's acceptance of it.

An invitation, pray about it

Love does not always say "Yes." I invite those who feels that God's Love is about including same sex romance (eros) to inter into some serious and earnest quiet meditation with God and his intimate love (The Greek word is Agape). It will far surpass anything you will experience from a same sex partner. Try to stay open to what God is saying. I believe that the answer will be clear. Honest prayer will reveal the same answer that God spoke in his living word, the Bible. God is not fickle like some politicians. When he says something he means it. He is most certainly all about Love and every loving parent lays down rules for their children who they love, so that they will be safe. My hope is that every advocate for gay marriage will bring this to the Lord.

Sources of help

The Catholic organization "Courage",help GLBT people who want to explore their relationship with Christ and who want to come into alignment with his will around sex.  Sexaholics Anonymous has been successful at helping people maintain a chaste lifestyle in accordance with biblical teachings.  Other sites include:

Zacchaeus
Exodus (organized by Evangelicals)
www.newdirection.ca
www.freetobeme.com
www.ewm.org

You can also start your own group. Approach you priest or pastor and ask him for some space on a weeknight. I bet you will get it. I invision a world where Churches are actively seeking to help people with same sex attraction, to stay chaste.

God heals our sexuality in many different ways. He has a plan for each person. Perhaps some people will remain celibate, others will feel called to marriage with a person of the opposite sex. Many have had successful straight marriages and have had kids. Some will struggle with same sex attraction for their lifetime and will need much support to remain sexually chaste. Others will be completely freed. There is no prescription. But the common thread is that those who turn to the Lord get an amazing amount of support and freedom. Jesus really does heal. The closer we get to him, the more freedom we experience.

Evangelical vs. Catholic outlook on same sex attraction -homosexuality

Catholics and Evangelicals agree that the Bible is the living Word of God who's moral standards are absolute and not subject to relativism. No denomination believes in the "if it feels right, do it" approach to morality. They recognize that we humans are just too morally frail to be entrusted to knowing what's best for us. We need the direction of the Bible.

However, there are some differences between Evangelical and Catholic views.

Evangelicals often feel that God can and will perform a complete healing and change the homosexual orientation to heterosexual in those who press into the Lord and faithfully ask for healing. Catholics agree that God can do anything but Catholics are not as quick to say that God will change the "orientation" for everyone who asks. This is the Catholic take on all illness. Sometimes he removes the illness and sometimes it remains a "thorn in the side." Trials and suffering are a mystery.

Evangelicals tend to think about same sex attraction more in terms of environmental causes, (i.e., childhood). Some Evangelicals don't think anyone is born with a predisposition to same sex attraction. This may be because some Evangelicals are not as much into the concept of "original sin" as Catholics.

Catholics say "we don't know whether its nurture or nature." Catholics believe that we are all born with original sin inherited from our first parents (Adam & Eve) and therefore our struggles can be a result of more than the environment that we were raised in. (That's why Catholics baptize babies.) Catholics don't view sin as something only a cognitive adult is capable of. Catholics think we are all born with it. All of us have struggles with sin. You are not alone. We all have some kind of sin. The good news is, God loves us so much that he gave his only begotten son that whoever believes in him will have everlasting life. (Jn 3:16)

Catholics also feel that the call to a celibate consecrated single life is a legitimate one. A gay man or lesbian can accept that path just as easily as a heterosexual can. Scripture says not everyone is called to the married life. (Mat 11:2, 1 Cor 7:6, 1 Cor 7:24-40)  If a member of the GLBT community through God's grace, becomes attracted to the opposite sex, then the Church is totally cool with them getting married to a person of the opposite sex. If not, then they are called to abstain from sex. The important thing is that we live out, in an authentic way, Jesus' call to us.

Paul comfortingly reminds us, "No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it" (1 Cor. 10:13).

However, Evangelicals and Catholics can easily team up and help each other. Our churches are places where gay people should be accepted. The Church is for broken people, and all of us are broken to a certain degree. We can be welcoming to all people who are looking for answers to life's difficult issues, including same sex attraction.

Evangelicals and Catholics can also join together in lobbying government and making our opinions heard. We had 6,000 people on Parliament Hill this year and it was a mix of Catholics and Evangelicals. Way to go guys.

Scripture verses on the validity of a consecrated single life (no gay or hetero sexual relationships):

Some people are called to a celibate life. Scripture often talks about this as a legitimate call from God. So don't despair if you have prayed and prayed and you are still feel you are not called to hetero marriage. Here are some Scriptures.

Matthew 19:10-12
...his disciples said to him, "If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry." But he said to them, "Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can."

1 Cor 7:6-9
...This I say by way of concession, not of command. I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has a particular gift from God, one having one kind and another a different kind. To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain unmarried as I am. But if they are not practicing self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.

1 Cor 7:24-35
...In whatever condition you were called, brothers and sisters, there remain with God. Now concerning virgins, I have no command of the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy. I think that, in view of the impending crisis, it is well for you to remain as you are. Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be free. Are you free from a wife? Do not seek a wife... Yet those who marry will experience distress in this life, and I would spare you that. I mean, brothers and sisters, the appointed time has grown short; from now on, let even those who have wives be as though they had none,  but the married man is anxious about the affairs of the world, how to please his wife,  and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman and the virgin are anxious about the affairs of the Lord, so that they may be holy in body and spirit; but the married woman is anxious about the affairs of the world, how to please her husband. I say this for your own benefit, not to put any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and unhindered devotion to the Lord.

1 Cor 7:38-40
...So then, he who marries his fiancee does well; and he who refrains from marriage will do better. A wife is bound as long as her husband lives. But if the husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, only in the Lord. But in my judgment she is more blessed if she remains as she is.

Footnotes:

(1) Stonewall was a huge violent demonstration by the New York gay community after a series of police raids

(2) Capital Extra, Oct. 7, 2004

(3) The divorce rate in the US (2000) is 0.41. Several researches have been made, correlating profession with divorce rate, but after checking also with the US Census, none surveyed all professions and their divorce rates. There are several professions that have been surveyed, see more in here http://www.divorcereform.org/cor.html ...There are several professions with more conclusive evidences. In the medical profession, the number of divorces varies from one discipline to another. "After decades of following 1,118 physicians who graduated from the Hopkins School of Medicine between 1948 and 1964, researchers found a 51 percent divorce rate for psychiatrists and 33 percent for surgeons, rates higher than those for internists (24 percent), pediatricians and pathologists (each 22 percent). The study revealed a 32 percent overall physician divorce rate." (http://www.jhu.edu/~gazette/janmar97/mar1797/briefs.html - first article). According to this site http://webweekly.hms.harvard.edu/archive/2001/4_9/student_scene.html -
"In some medical specialties-psychiatry, for example-divorce rates stand at about 50 percent (from The New England Journal of Medicine as quoted in White Coat by alum Ellen Rothman)". From http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=36331

 

Lord Jesus, please pour your Grace
upon the gay community. Heal the brokenness
we have absolute confidence
that you can bring your people together
we give you absolute permission to move
Amen

David's Music CD Here