Changing marriage definition can have long-term consequences

Legalizing same-sex marriage could affect Catholics' everyday lives, create a chilling effect on speaking beliefs

BY JEAN PARIETTI

Defense of traditional marriage isn't simply a matter of espousing a religious belief — it encompasses universal human values, according to a Gonzaga University law professor.

With same-sex marriage on the verge of becoming a reality in Washington state and a referendum on the issue a real likelihood, some Catholics may wonder if they have the right to determine how others live, and whether opposing gay marriage is discriminatory.

"We've often thought it's our job as Catholics to respect others' beliefs," said Gonzaga professor David K. DeWolf, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute in Seattle. "We don't impose our religious beliefs on them, and therefore we shouldn't impose our values on them. But in some areas the values we hold are universal — such as our commitment to equality regardless of race. In such cases it is appropriate to ‘impose our values' — because they aren't just ours. They're human values," he explained.

Complementary nature
Traditional marriage, between one man and one woman, is at the core of a thriving culture, and changing its definition can have long-term negative consequences for society, DeWolf explained during a recent presentation at St. Michael Church in Olympia and in subsequent interviews.

"You don't have to be Catholic to recognize, as societies always have, that one of the central purposes of marriage is to channel the reproductive capacities of men and women so that the process of having children is associated with the bond between husband and wife," DeWolf said. This ideal commitment is valued, he said, because it makes the parents most likely to persevere in raising their children.

And by its nature, a marriage between a man and a woman is complementary, with the partner of the opposite sex bringing different strengths to the relationship, DeWolf said. Same-sex relationships can't provide the same benefits to the couple, the family and society as traditional marriage can.

"There isn't the degree of complementarity, there isn't the degree of openness to life, there isn't the fruitfulness found in heterosexual marriage," DeWolf explained.

Equality issue?
Supporters of same-sex marriage make the argument that it's a civil rights issue, similar to changing the laws that prohibited a man and woman of different races from getting married. DeWolf said there's a fundamental difference.

"Racial segregation was an artificial distinction based on something — race — that isn't intrinsic to our nature as human beings," he said. The differences between male and female, however, are intrinsic to human nature.

"Although equal in dignity, men and women are different," DeWolf said. "In recognizing these differences, we are protecting something important about the nature of marriage."

Under the proposed law, clergy wouldn't be required to marry gay people, but it's currently the case that "no one has the right to have someone perform a marriage contrary to their religious beliefs," DeWolf said. For example, a priest would never be required to marry a divorced couple.

DeWolf said there already have been calls to separate civil marriage from sacramental marriage, as is the custom in some countries. However, he said, "this inverts the true status of marriage as something that preceded the state — something the state recognizes, rather than something that the state created."

Everyday effects
If same-sex marriage becomes a reality, Catholics and others who don't agree with the culture could find themselves affected in daily life, from their workplaces to their children's schools, and maybe even in what they can say freely.

"The biggest challenge is probably less to the clergy [in the pulpit] on Sunday morning than to the laypeople who go to work at Microsoft or Starbucks," or other companies that support gay marriage, DeWolf said.

"It is already the case that ‘tolerance' or even enthusiasm for ‘diversity' in this area is an expectation in many institutions — sadly, including Catholic universities," he said. "Anyone who wants to get hired, or who wants to be promoted, cannot afford to speak out plainly and clearly about the true nature of marriage. When I did so among my faculty colleagues," DeWolf said, "I was told that what I said was in violation of our ‘antidiscrimination' policy. If this legislation becomes law, it is likely to be extended to more institutions."

In public schools, there's increasing pressure to conform to a mindset that's hostile to Christian values, he said. Although private schools aren't required to teach students about homosexuality, "there have already been cases in which private schools were denied recognition or forced to change their curriculum because of the application of standards hostile to religious belief," he noted.

Chilling effect
In some countries, legal action has been taken against those who have made public anti-gay comments. In Sweden, a pastor who preached a sermon against homosexual behavior was sentenced to a month in jail for hate speech.

In Canada, a pastor who denounced gay people in a newspaper's letter to the editor section was ordered by the Alberta Human Rights Commission to pay $5,000 in damages, apologize and stop public criticism of homosexuals.

"Both findings were later overturned, but the chilling effect is very real," DeWolf said.

Cultural acceptance of same-sex marriage could frighten Catholics into silence, in the workplace or elsewhere, he said.

"This is one of the ways I think our faith will be threatened," DeWolf said. "It will be treated as something that doesn't fit the modern times."

February 9, 2012